I added support scatter plots of vectors/matrices; will update docs and examples tomorrow. I also made the interface closer to Gadfly's.
On Thursday, May 22, 2014 12:31:39 PM UTC-4, John Myles White wrote: > > I personally don’t really have much interest in plotting in the terminal. > I just packaged the code other people had written so that it would be > easily available to the community. I’m happy to let people who care about > the topic take charge of things. > > — John > > On May 22, 2014, at 8:42 AM, Adam Smith <[email protected]<javascript:>> > wrote: > > TextPlot seems like a good name. > > Thanks for the offer on merging, but again, there's really nothing to > merge. Adding scatterplots to dotplot will be trivial; I'll do that soon > (making dotplot's features a superset of ASCIIPlots). There is nothing > compatible/overlapping between these two (small) codebases for merging to > make sense. > > I would be curious what John Myles White thinks about a more complete > terminal plotting package for Julia. ASCIIPlots clearly imitates Matlab's > plotting functions ("imagesc"), and I was going for something closer to > Mathematica or Maple (which are more symbolic-oriented than Matlab), since > I think the syntax is prettier. However, I know a large portion of Julia's > users are also Matlab users, so if Matlab-compatibility is a goal, you may > want to keep the packages separate. > > On Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:25:01 AM UTC-4, Leah Hanson wrote: >> >> Maybe something like TextPlot would be a good merged name? It conveys >> what the package does (text plots) rather than how it does it (Braille >> characters). >> >> Having a more complete plotting package for the terminal would move >> towards having a way to make `plot` just work when you start up a Julia >> REPL, which I think is a goal. I'd be happy to help merge them, but >> probably won't have time for a couple weeks. >> >> -- Leah >> >> >> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Adam Smith <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I'm not totally opposed to it, but my initial reaction is not to: >>> >>> 1. I don't necessarily agree about the name. I personally think "dot >>> plot" has a nice ring to it, and it is a more accurate description of >>> what >>> it does (using Braille characters). This very specifically exploits >>> Unicode >>> (non-ASCII) characters, so calling it an ASCII plot would be misleading >>> (for those who want the restricted character set for some reason). >>> 2. There's not really a single line of code they have in common, so >>> there's nothing to "merge": it would just be a rename. I didn't look at >>> the >>> code of ASCIIPlots before making it, and we chose completely different >>> APIs. For example, ASCIIPlots doesn't have a way to plot functions, and >>> DotPlot doesn't (yet) have a way to scatterplot an array. >>> 3. They are both quite small and simple (dotplot is ~100 lines of >>> code, ascii is ~250); merging would probably be more work than either >>> originally took to create. >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, May 22, 2014 1:31:10 AM UTC-4, Ivar Nesje wrote: >>>> >>>> Would it make sense to merge this functionality into ASCIIPlots? To me >>>> that seems like a better name, and John Myles White is likely to be >>>> willing >>>> to transfer the repository if you want to be the maintainer. That package >>>> started from code posted on the mailing list, and the author thought it >>>> was >>>> a joke. John packaged it for others to use. >>> >>> >> >
