On 20.07.08, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> It is probably too late for this change but ...
>
> The name of pyx.graph.data.function has always bugged me.
>
> 1. A class by that name really should take a python function
> as an argument.
Why? Applying your logic to the discussion we had about
pyx.graph.data.points and pyx.graph.data.values would mean that both
should be called "pyx.graph.data.list". Note that the name
pyx.graph.data.function describes the _meaning_ of the plotting type
(as differencing it from discrete data) and not the _data_type_
which it takes.
> 2. The string argument that the current class takes instead
> is really an expression that specifies that values of a
> function y(x).
>
> It is probably too late to rename it (e.g., to ``functiondef``)
"functiondef" is not to my liking. It resembles too much the
definition of a function, which is not what it does.
> but perhaps it could *also* accept a Python function?
> (Using a Python function what I usually want, and I would
> like not to be forced to know anything about the context.)
Note that the expression string does more than just providing any
function. It also indicates how to use it. I use for example things
like
"y(x) = f(x)"
"x(y) = f(y)"
"y2(x) = g(x)"
How would you propose to add these functionality to the case where
you give a function object? Of course, one could add more string
parameters to indicate where the function evaluates y, y2 or even x,
but does that simplify anything?
Michael
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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=/
_______________________________________________
PyX-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyx-user
