matplotlib-devel Mailing List for matplotlib

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
<fri...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> may it be that you used different compilers for compiling your
> FreeType2 and your matplotlib? [CC=gcc-4.2] It's nearly impossible
> to tell afterwards from the libraries.
>
> I was able to compile matplotlib (not the svn though) on OS X Snow
> Leopard /without/ using the make.osx script. One has to apply some
> changes, but not large ones.
>
> John, I have the slight impression that you constantly try to ignore
> me, can you give a good reason, then I will be satisfied. Fixing the
> _png.cpp issue for libpng 1.4 would be a good start to make matplotlib
> compilable without the effort of make.osx.
Sorry, I wasn't intentionally ignoring you. I don't have as much time
as I'd like on the mpl mailing list so I sometimes dart in and out.
If there is some thread or two or three where you would like me to
comment or have some patches that need attention, please point me to
them.
Frequently, threads and contributions get left behind. Usually, the
slight is not intentional but just due to bandwidth constraints. It
happens enough that we have a FAQ :-)
 http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/faq/howto_faq.html#contributing-howto
JDH

Hi Michael,
may it be that you used different compilers for compiling your
FreeType2 and your matplotlib? [CC=gcc-4.2] It's nearly impossible
to tell afterwards from the libraries.
I was able to compile matplotlib (not the svn though) on OS X Snow
Leopard /without/ using the make.osx script. One has to apply some
changes, but not large ones.
John, I have the slight impression that you constantly try to ignore
me, can you give a good reason, then I will be satisfied. Fixing the
_png.cpp issue for libpng 1.4 would be a good start to make matplotlib
compilable without the effort of make.osx.
I want to add that I'm not an expert and used just standard
approaches. But they worked (for me). Especially I have way to
little knowledge of the implications of 64bit.
Best,
Friedrich

Erik,
Thanks for addressing this. I actually ran into this problem once a while
back, but just figured that I was doing something wrong. I will check out
your patch to see how well it works.
Ben Root
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Erik Tollerud <eri...@gm...>wrote:
> I noticed some odd behavior in the legend and managed to track down
> the source of the problem and make a fix (a diff against the current
> svn is attached). Specifically, two things were fixed:
>
> *The "markerscale" argument for the legend seems to do nothing... The
> attached diff properly applies the markerscale scaling for
> polygon/circle collections and the markers for lines with markers (but
> NOT patches or the width of lines elements in the legend).
>
> *If the "scatterpoints" argument was >3, all points beyond 3
> disappeared. This was because the default scatteryoffset only had 3
> entries, so if you didn't specifically overwrite this, the points
> beyond 3 didn't appear. I've re-worked this so that now the default
> properly deals with a number of points other than 3.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
> lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Mat...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
>

I noticed some odd behavior in the legend and managed to track down
the source of the problem and make a fix (a diff against the current
svn is attached). Specifically, two things were fixed:
*The "markerscale" argument for the legend seems to do nothing... The
attached diff properly applies the markerscale scaling for
polygon/circle collections and the markers for lines with markers (but
NOT patches or the width of lines elements in the legend).
*If the "scatterpoints" argument was >3, all points beyond 3
disappeared. This was because the default scatteryoffset only had 3
entries, so if you didn't specifically overwrite this, the points
beyond 3 didn't appear. I've re-worked this so that now the default
properly deals with a number of points other than 3.