matplotlib-devel Mailing List for matplotlib

On 2012年07月23日 11:43 AM, Damon McDougall wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> So, as per Philip's suggestion
> (https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/737) I've started
> encapsulating fplot functionality into a class. The point of this is so
> that the user can call either of the following:
>
> FPlot_instance = ax.fplot(f, [x0, y0, x1, y1])
> ax.fplot(FPlot_instance, ...)
The second of these seems odd to me; I would expect FPlot_instance to 
have a __call__ method, so the normal use of an existing instance would be
FPlot_instance(...)
Also, regarding the second argument in the first form: I would think it 
more natural to split it up into a required [x0, x1] and an optional 
[y0, y1], with autoscaling if it is not provided.
Eric

Hello all,
So, as per Philip's suggestion
(https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/737) I've started
encapsulating fplot functionality into a class. The point of this is so
that the user can call either of the following:
FPlot_instance = ax.fplot(f, [x0, y0, x1, y1])
ax.fplot(FPlot_instance, ...)
Each of these is valid. The first does 'the obvious', as seen in the
closed PR above. The second takes an instance of an FPlot object,
presumably the user would also pass new limits to, say, zoom out. Then
the plot is updated as necessary. This was also Philip's suggestion and
there is a nice working example of changing the limits of a plot to get
a more highly resolved image in examples/event_handling/viewlims.py
I haven't put in a new pull request because I can't decide which of
these methods is better. In short, the viewlims.py example uses a
callback to adjust the plot if the user calls set_xlim or set_ylim.
Would it be sensible to use a callback for fplot buried in the FPlot
class or use my initial thought, which is to pass in a new tuple
describing the new axes limits and update if necessary?
The code isn't complete so I'm reluctant to file a new PR, but if there
is overwhelming desire for people to see the code (perhaps due to my
poor explanation) then I'll open a new PR so everyone can give their two
pence.
Suggestions welcome :)
-- 
Damon McDougall
http://damon-is-a-geek.com
B2.39
Mathematics Institute
University of Warwick
Coventry
West Midlands
CV4 7AL
United Kingdom

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 3:21 PM, John Hunter <jd...@gm...> wrote:
> I would like to discuss a timetable towards a python3 release (1.2 or
> 2.0). I'll throw this out there, and am happy to make modifications
> according to feedback
>
> Aug 20th : feature freeze and branch. bugfixes only going forward from
> this point
>
> Sept 15th: rc1
>
> Oct 7th: rc2
>
> Oct 15th release
>
> I know we have lots of open and interesting pull requests to get in, and
> so if we need to push these times back to get them in that is fine. Just
> wanted to put something out there to see if this timeline seems plausible
> to people.
>
> JDH
>
>
I think the schedule is reasonable. We are going to need significant help
getting through our backlog of PRs. At the very least, we need to identify
which ones are release critical or not.
Just as a note, I don't know whether or not we want to have my axes.py
refactor included in this release or not. If most of my attention is going
to be on the documentation and PR push, it is extremely unlikely I am going
to get much further with it in the next couple of months.
Ben Root

Dear macosx backend users,
Could you please have a look at pull request 
https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/1036. It removes a minor 
annoyance where only the last figure would appear to the front after 
issuing a non-interactive show().
It builds upon https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/663, 
delivered with matplotlib 1.1.1.
Cheers,
-Gellule