BenBE

@leahneukirchen Anything left to do from your side? If not please mark the PR ready for review. TIA.

AFAICS this is waiting for some refactoring work, but that work is yet not fully specified/explained. @cgzones can you please elaborate the open discussion threads?.

> 1. @BenBE , I don't know what your idea is regarding to showing "a special graph that displays a second data series downwards instead of stacked on top". ```...

> I think the idea for "*a special graph that displays a second data series downwards instead of stacked on top*" is something like this: >  > > (Just...

> > Looks as envisioned*. Mind to build a PR from this? > > *except for the "pixel" gaps … > > The "pixel gaps" were from the bug I...

> > > (b) To disable bar and graph mode rendering, my preferred way is to check `MeterClass.maxItems == 0`. That way no additional flag is needed. > > >...

I think, even for graph mode 1a/1b vs. 2 it's not that clear cut even though the gm2 is mostly a special case. Not all data you can stack in...

Another aspect for this PR is that "per mode checks" are difficult to iterate through automatically. Also, basically we are already using an implicit bitmap of "all supported" right now.

> I'm curious about one thing. Since this patch would disable certain modes for certain meters, what would happen if the user has an htop configuration that sets a meter...

Those patches overall LGTM. Some changes: 1. Squash 50c9058a into d70b8cc7. 2. In d70b8cc7 split the change in `Meter.h` (and related changes). 3. Commit d70b8cc7 should be split into the...