Hi,
Le 03/06/2020 à 13:01, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
Dear Stéphane,
This thread was on Bugzilla for more than 4 years, and the commit was
on review for a full year.
This feature is completely back-compatible. It breaks nothing.
About any "spirit" : The only one that i know -- and it has always
been very explicit -- is to improve Scilab by all possible and
relevant ways.
IMHO in no way considering Scilab as a museum of features coming from
anywhere else, or even internal, as in a showcase preventing any
forthcoming changes -- could be considered as a way for improving Scilab.
The new "logflags" argument is actually badly named in the
documentation. It must rather be seen as the initial implementation of
a more extended "AxesSpec" argument,
That's where we definitively do not agree. To me, specification of Axes
properties should not be given as _explicit_ arguments to plot(), which
accepts polyline properties.
as "LineSpec" already exists and makes plot() much more handy than
plot2d(). Simply, to me, the priority was to transfer the plot2d() log
feature to plot(), as a first step. Indeed, it was the only feature
missing to plot() that somewhat made me sticking to plot2d().
plot() can still be improved in many ways, without breaking anything.
Just about this axesSpec (a report should be posted), here are some
ideas to go on designing it:
* allowing to switch the direction of each axis, by using the "-" symbol
* allowing to set the position, by using a "r", "t", or "c" symbol
(for Right, Top, Center)
* allowing to set the grid (for instance with the "_" symbol)
* allowing to set the legend (for instance as last field, after the
first @ symbol, since this one is already used in the legacy "leg"
option)
* .. for instance using "|" as axis separator (that then could not
be used in legends)
Sorry, but using a complicated multi-character string would be a
regression compared to setting correctly documented properties of Axes
(before or afterwards). The time where we could only use one
(complicated) string to speficity many stuff has gone...
*
IMHO, may be it's the right time to announce the deprecation of
plot2d() in its documentation, to make it an internal in Scilab 6.2 or
6.3.
You seem to fear other plot2d() extra options. As you, i would not
regret strf and nax ones, whose names and encoding are very criptic,
and just impossible to remember. There were likely designed before
graphical properties were implemented to address them in a detailed way.
About plot() Global properties:
They are dedicated to polylines, not to axes. So adding any axes
properties to them would break the idea, indeed. Yet, AFAIU still some
polyline setting can't be tuned through LineSpec nor a Global
property, like the curve's thickness. It's a pity. We could think
about improving this.
Yes.
On the other hand, Global Properties are less useful now than
formerly, for 2 main reasons:
* set() is now vectorized: It now allows to set several properties
in a single call. This is a quite recent feature (added in ~6.0.1).
* Assigning a given property for a vectors of handles (as a group of
polylines) has been a lot of improved in 6.0.2
This recent double vectorization makes complex assignements of (scalar
or non scalar) values to vectors of polylines handles much easier, and
in a more extensive way than only through Global properties.
About any semilogx, semilogy, loglog functions:
When in 2D 3 functions can be simply replaced with 3 understandable
values of a single option in an existing function, that just tells
that they are completely useless.
Who would tell that in 3D we would have to create 7 separate functions
to deal with all x/y/z log/normal possible combinations? So why doing
it in 2D?
And why only for the log status? Then, in the same way, why not
creating some invXplot(), invYplot(), invXYplot(), to directly plot
inverted axes, and so, of course, invSemilogX(), etc..?
Haha, I like your sense of humor...
To me, all this is just meaningless.
Now, if former matlabers wish to still use their prefered former
functions, of course adding them in an external compatibility toolbox
is possible, as you did in plotlib.
By the way, similar functions already exist in Scilab, as
mtlb_semilogx, mtlb_semilogy, mtlb_loglog, in the m2sci module.
We can't on one hand make strong efforts to remove all existing
duplicates or uselessly split features, and on the other one make
strong efforts to build new ones as somewhat strange and absurd ones
that already exist.
At least, if so, personnally i would not go on about any cleaning and
clarifying task in Scilab.
This is why, to me, the introduced AxesSpec feature is great, clear,
fully enabled, and already complete for log/lin tuning at calling time.
While i am sorry to still not understanding your point.
So do I...
S.
Best regards
Samuel
Le 13/03/2020 à 11:18, Stéphane Mottelet a écrit :
Hi,
I don't approve this commit
(https://codereview.scilab.org/#/c/20879/8) which was merged just
before the release (I didn't even have the time to give it a -1). It
represents a complete breakdown with the spirit of "plot", whose help
page says "plot has been rebuild to better handle Matlab syntax. To
improve graphical compatibility, Matlab users should use plot (rather
than plot2d)". Until now, the behavior of plot was customized by
means of "propertyName/value" pairs given after the (x,y) pairs.
With this new logflags syntax, we have an optionnal first argument of
"value" type without its "propertyName", moreover this is a "value"
of an Axes property. At worse, but it would not have been more
coherent, the expected feature could have been implemented as a pair
"log_flags",string among other "propertyName/value".
plot() had the merit of being more user friendly that plot2d(). With
this commit, it started its convergence towards plot2d(), which is
not a reference of user friendliness. One implicit rule is: when we
introduce functions with Matlab's functions names and trying to
emulate some of its features, then the Scilab function has to respect
the subset of the Matlab API it implements and not mix with custom
Scilab syntax. There are plenty of such functions in Scilab and this
is a pity. We have implemented plot(), mesh(), surf(), light() and
instead of breaking plot() to allow logarithmic plots it would have
been simpler to emulate the corresponding functions in Matlab,
namely, semilogx(), semilogy(), loglog(). So I hope that this commit
will be quickly reverted in favor of
https://codereview.scilab.org/#/c/21436/, in order to prevent bad
habits of average users who could start using the logflags syntax.
S.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@lists.scilab.org
https://antispam.utc.fr/proxy/1/c3RlcGhhbmUubW90dGVsZXRAdXRjLmZy/lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
--
Stéphane Mottelet
Ingénieur de recherche
EA 4297 Transformations Intégrées de la Matière Renouvelable
Département Génie des Procédés Industriels
Sorbonne Universités - Université de Technologie de Compiègne
CS 60319, 60203 Compiègne cedex
Tel : +33(0)344234688
http://www.utc.fr/~mottelet
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@lists.scilab.org
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
