#5448: [with patch, needs work] rework save/show in plot, use Matplotlib's axes
code, upgrade matplotlib
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Reporter: mhansen | Owner: mhansen
Type: enhancement | Status: assigned
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.1.2
Component: graphics | Keywords:
Reviewer: | Author:
Merged: |
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Comment(by kcrisman):
Replying to [comment:30 jason]:
> Replying to [comment:29 kcrisman]:
> > >
> > > > 3. there needs to be a slightly better algorithm for deciding what
direction the ticks face. E.g. look at plot(x**3,-1,0).
> > >
> > > Agreed. Do you have a suggestion? Maybe if the axis is in the
middle of the picture, put ticks on both sides, and if it is on the side
of the picture, put ticks facing inwards?
> > >
> >
> > I thought that was already the convention, but it was screwed up in
this plot. I think that in general ticks on the right/top are okay,
except where the axis is beyond the entire plot. Probably that isn't the
case for this plot, but it still looks weird.
> >
>
>
> Right now the convention was to put left-facing ticks unless the axis
was beyond the plot on the right. Then put right-facing ticks. In your
example, the axes were still considered to be inside the plot.
>
Because x=0 was in it... hmm, maybe that should be axis <= plot, instead
of axis < plot? If that makes sense. This is obviously painting the
shed, of course.
>
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 4. compare plot(x**4,-1,54) and plot(x**4,-1,55). Notice how once
the scientific notation comes into play, matplotlib doesn't label
correctly.
> > >
> > > As in the top is cut off? Is that what you are talking about?
> > >
> > > We can change how the labels are printed pretty easily. What do you
suggest?
> > >
> >
> > No, I mean that the labels are WRONG. The scientific notation only
shows up at the very top e.g. 2e8 or something, and the rest are just 1,
1.5, etc; certainly the fourth power function does not stay around 1, 1.5
very long. Having 2e8 or 1.5e8 is okay, of course.
> >
>
>
> I think they mean that the number at the top of the axis shows the units
of the labels. You would rather have labels in units of 1 always, I
presume?
Well, since the number at the top of the axis was getting cut off, that
was a problem. I still think it could be confusing, though 1e200000 is
probably not an ideal label if you got numbers that large (if they were
even plottable). I like what happened before with
{{{
sage: plot(x^4,-1,2000)
}}}
better, though it was also sometimes inconsistent and things got cut off,
for instance
{{{
sage: plot(x^4,-1,1500)
}}}
So it seems that explicit and longer is better than implicit and shorter,
in this case.
Maybe it's time to start declaring this reviewed and make new tickets for
the other things...
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5448#comment:31>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
