Eric Firing wrote: >>> Quiver and windbarb could use the axes.delete_masked_points function >>> right at the start, and this might be a good change to make, except >>> that it is inconsistent with using the present set_UVC method to >>> update arrows at constant locations. >> >> delete_masked_points() looks to me like a sane way to go. I'll update >> my masked handling to use this. > > It can be OK if your windbarb is intended as a one-shot instance--that > is, the user makes another one if the data change--which is probably OK. > > delete_masked_points looks to me like it has its own problems in the > whole mpl-with-units context, including a recent change that I suspect > breaks the handling of datetime inputs, but I don't think that any > changes or cleanups will affect your use of it.
What I've tried to do is keep copies of the original data passed in, and when updating UV or offsets, use delete_masked_points to keep them lined up as appropriate. Does this sound reasonable? It doesn't look too bad, and still keeps an interface that allows updating. Ryan -- Ryan May Graduate Research Assistant School of Meteorology University of Oklahoma ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Matplotlib-devel mailing list Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
