You can subscribe to this list here.
2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(33) |
Dec
(20) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2004 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(44) |
Mar
(51) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(43) |
Jun
(36) |
Jul
(61) |
Aug
(44) |
Sep
(25) |
Oct
(82) |
Nov
(97) |
Dec
(47) |
2005 |
Jan
(77) |
Feb
(143) |
Mar
(42) |
Apr
(31) |
May
(93) |
Jun
(93) |
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(78) |
Sep
(56) |
Oct
(44) |
Nov
(72) |
Dec
(75) |
2006 |
Jan
(116) |
Feb
(99) |
Mar
(181) |
Apr
(171) |
May
(112) |
Jun
(86) |
Jul
(91) |
Aug
(111) |
Sep
(77) |
Oct
(72) |
Nov
(57) |
Dec
(51) |
2007 |
Jan
(64) |
Feb
(116) |
Mar
(70) |
Apr
(74) |
May
(53) |
Jun
(40) |
Jul
(519) |
Aug
(151) |
Sep
(132) |
Oct
(74) |
Nov
(282) |
Dec
(190) |
2008 |
Jan
(141) |
Feb
(67) |
Mar
(69) |
Apr
(96) |
May
(227) |
Jun
(404) |
Jul
(399) |
Aug
(96) |
Sep
(120) |
Oct
(205) |
Nov
(126) |
Dec
(261) |
2009 |
Jan
(136) |
Feb
(136) |
Mar
(119) |
Apr
(124) |
May
(155) |
Jun
(98) |
Jul
(136) |
Aug
(292) |
Sep
(174) |
Oct
(126) |
Nov
(126) |
Dec
(79) |
2010 |
Jan
(109) |
Feb
(83) |
Mar
(139) |
Apr
(91) |
May
(79) |
Jun
(164) |
Jul
(184) |
Aug
(146) |
Sep
(163) |
Oct
(128) |
Nov
(70) |
Dec
(73) |
2011 |
Jan
(235) |
Feb
(165) |
Mar
(147) |
Apr
(86) |
May
(74) |
Jun
(118) |
Jul
(65) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(162) |
Oct
(94) |
Nov
(48) |
Dec
(44) |
2012 |
Jan
(49) |
Feb
(40) |
Mar
(88) |
Apr
(35) |
May
(52) |
Jun
(69) |
Jul
(90) |
Aug
(123) |
Sep
(112) |
Oct
(120) |
Nov
(105) |
Dec
(116) |
2013 |
Jan
(76) |
Feb
(26) |
Mar
(78) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(61) |
Jun
(53) |
Jul
(147) |
Aug
(85) |
Sep
(83) |
Oct
(122) |
Nov
(18) |
Dec
(27) |
2014 |
Jan
(58) |
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(49) |
Apr
(17) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(39) |
Jul
(53) |
Aug
(52) |
Sep
(35) |
Oct
(47) |
Nov
(110) |
Dec
(27) |
2015 |
Jan
(50) |
Feb
(93) |
Mar
(96) |
Apr
(30) |
May
(55) |
Jun
(83) |
Jul
(44) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(5) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(1) |
2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
(7) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
(1) |
2
(2) |
3
(2) |
4
|
5
(4) |
6
(1) |
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
(4) |
16
(2) |
17
(1) |
18
(1) |
19
(5) |
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
(1) |
28
(1) |
|
On 31 January 2014 22:43, Benjamin Root <ben...@ou...> wrote: > Thanks for bringing this back onto the mailing list. > > I am excited for the prospect of new algorithms for contouring. My company > has actually been using the contourf() function for the past few years to > generate the polygons from gridded data to then make shapefiles from those > polygons. Having an rcParam and a kwarg for controlling which algorithm > gets used for contouring would be good for us when we transition to any new > algorithms. > It is good to hear that it will be useful. > I also advocate strongly for better separation between the plotting and > the contouring. I made an attempt awhile back for my work to not have to > call contourf() so that my shapefile library code wouldn't interfere with > anybody's plotting that they happen to be doing, but I just couldn't get a > clean separation. I ended up having to wrap my contouring code as a > sub-process. > This is not in the scope of the work I am doing - see my previous answer to Eric. > Do keep me in the loop about this, as I have a fairly substantial data > source for testing. > Excellent, testing by others will be much appreciated. I won't submit a PR on this until after the impending release so there is plenty of time for testing before the release after that. Ian
On 31 January 2014 19:51, Eric Firing <ef...@ha...> wrote: > Would the new code be substantially simpler if the blocky capability were > omitted from it? If so, then it seems like it would makes sense to leave > the blocky form to the old code. > Simpler, yes, but not substantially so. I would prefer to keep both blocky and corner-cutting algorithms together so that there is only one extension to maintain when we eventually remove the old code. One thing to keep in mind is the desire for a cleaner separation between > the generation of the contours and their plotting. Sometimes one actually > wants the polygons themselves; for example, topographic contours can be > used to define boundaries for internal wave flux calculations. A student > here at UH is doing exactly this. > That is certainly desirable, but not part of the work I am doing. I am rewriting the C/C++ code that calculates the contours, but the interface between that and the python contour code remains the same, apart from some trivial changes of course. Ian