Manuel,
Sorry for the delay in looking at your patch.
I am not familiar with this type of plot, as opposed to ordinary
errorbars. What is it used for? What is the meaning of the upper and
lower limits?
The errorbar docstring will need to be modified to explain the new
kwargs. Additional comments are interspersed below.
Manuel Metz wrote:
> Hello,
> I have attached a patch that adds the ability to draw upper/lower limits
> indicators for errorbars. New keyword args had to be introduced to the
> errorbar command, and I also had to add new plot styles. I chose
> 'y','Y','z' and 'Z' as new linestyles for arrowheads pointing up,down,
> left, right (see lines.py).
These markers seem to me to be very special, more similar to the
TICKLEFT and friends than to the general-use markers for which letters
are assigned. Since there is nothing mnemonic about your suggested
letter assignments, I think it would be better not to further clutter
that list of letters, and instead to extend the list of tick-like
things. I suggest calling them CARETUP, CARETDOWN, etc, since they seem
to me more like carets than anything else. The change to names from
single characters will make the code in the errorbar method more readable.
>
> An example and its output is also attached.
>
> Eric: I know, I don't use masked array in this patch ;_) . The reason
> was that errorbar() also doesn't use them, and a did not want to
> completely change that function but just add the new feature. Switching
> to masked arrays should be straight forward, I think :-)
>
> Manuel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Index: axes.py
> ===================================================================
> --- axes.py (revision 3727)
> +++ axes.py (working copy)
> @@ -3554,7 +3554,30 @@
> lines_kw['linewidth']=kwargs['linewidth']
> if 'lw' in kwargs:
> lines_kw['lw']=kwargs['lw']
> -
> +
> + lolims = uplims = False
> + xlolims = xuplims = False
> + if 'lowerlimits' in kwargs:
> + lolims = kwargs.pop('lowerlimits')
> + if 'upperlimits' in kwargs:
> + uplims = kwargs.pop('upperlimits')
> + if 'xlowerlimits' in kwargs:
> + xlolims = kwargs.pop('xlowerlimits')
> + if 'xupperlimits' in kwargs:
> + xuplims = kwargs.pop('xupperlimits')
Instead of using **kwargs and popping them, the new kwargs should be
part of the signature. This would be consistent with the present
signature, in which **kwargs is used only to pass additional marker
parameters.
> +
> + if not iterable(lolims): lolims = npy.asarray([lolims]*len(x), bool)
Minor point: here (above) you *know* you are not starting with an array,
so it would be clearer and more efficient to use npy.array, reserving
npy.asarray for the case below where you *don't* know whether the
argument is an array or not.
> + else: lolims = npy.asarray(lolims, bool)
[...]
The main thing I need from you is the modified docstring, although a new
patch incorporating that and the other suggested changes would be even
better.
Eric