Christophe BAL:
I really appreciate the work done by matplotlib but I really think that
the interface must evolve. Here is a small example.
* object.set_something(...)*
*object.get_something()*
It could be easier to use a jQuery like style as in the following lines.
*object(...)*
*object()*
This will considerably simplify things.
Here is a more realistic example.
*fig = pylab.figure()*
*ax = fig.add_subplot(1,1,1)*
*
*
*ax.set_xlabel(*"xLabel"*)*
*ax.set_ylabel(*"yLabel"*)*
The a jQuery like style would be as in the following lines.
*fig = pylab.figure()*
*ax = fig.add_subplot(1,1,1)*
*
*
* ax(xlabel = *"xLabel"*, ylabel = *"yLabel"*)*
*
*
I don't know enough matplotlib to propose other examples
but I really think that *there is a lot **of things that could make *
*matplotlib much more Pythonicly easy to use.*
I am afraid I disagree a little bit. The call: object(...) [if object
is an instance, not a class, otherwise ths would be a constructor] -
- means object.call(...).
Now, in principle one can throw inside a generic "call" plenty of
attribute changes, but just imagine the parsing of all the possible
argument combination. And, BTW, what would it mean: xxx= ax() ? In
general case this is not practical.
The methods in Python called.through.the.dot.notation are there to stay,
I think.
Jerzy Karczmarczuk
Caen, France.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Matplotlib-users mailing list
Matplotlib-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users
