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
|
2
|
3
(1) |
4
(6) |
5
(14) |
6
(18) |
7
(2) |
8
(1) |
9
(6) |
10
(6) |
11
(1) |
12
(4) |
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
(9) |
19
|
20
(4) |
21
(1) |
22
|
23
(1) |
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
> > > Thanks for the update, I'll try it tuesday from work, but I don't think > > it will change anything. I'll post some pictures/data if you want. > > What I'm passing as argument for c is a numpy array of dimension (N, 3) > > with floats between 0 and 1. When I get rid of the check at line 3777, I > > can have a good scatter plot with the correct colors. > > OK, I thought that might be the case. The behavior you want was not > actually supported by scatter--at least it was contrary to the > docstring--but it is reasonable, so I have made changes that I think > will do what you want. I also changed the docstring to reflect this. > > Eric > Thanks a lot for the update, I appreciate the patience you had to understand what I wanted. Matthieu
Matthieu Brucher wrote: > This is done (with corresponding simplification of the code and improved > error checking and reporting), and I have made slight changes to > scatter, but there is still an ambiguity in scatter's argument handling. > It was and is resolved in favor of treating the c argument as an array > rather than an rgb or rgba sequence in any case where it could be > either. (To be safe, if you want c to be an mpl color, use a string > form of colorspec as specified in the scatter docstring.) I don't know > whether this ambiguity, or possibly a bug in its resolution, was what > prompted your original message. In any case, please try the svn version > and see if it does what you want. If it does not, then please say > exactly what c you are passing in to scatter, what scatter is doing, > and > what you think it should do instead. I never understood that from your > previous messages. > > Eric > > > Thanks for the update, I'll try it tuesday from work, but I don't think > it will change anything. I'll post some pictures/data if you want. > What I'm passing as argument for c is a numpy array of dimension (N, 3) > with floats between 0 and 1. When I get rid of the check at line 3777, I > can have a good scatter plot with the correct colors. OK, I thought that might be the case. The behavior you want was not actually supported by scatter--at least it was contrary to the docstring--but it is reasonable, so I have made changes that I think will do what you want. I also changed the docstring to reflect this. Eric