-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 514
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
improve functionality of matrix_plot #2189
Comments
comment:1
The patch implements custom ranges, and adds the It also fixes a few small bugs in the axes code Cheers, |
comment:3
Attempted to apply this to 3.3.alpha0 but in the meantime _render_on_subplot method of class MatrixPlot (due to #4884) and the documentation for matrix_plot have both changed, so does not apply cleanly. Needs a rebase. Nitpicks:
which looks horrible, but that should be checked when this is rebased. This will be very helpful, though, when complete, so thanks for the work! |
Attachment: trac_2189.patch.gz rebased for sage-3.3.alpha1 |
comment:4
Replying to @kcrisman:
I added a new patch based on 3.3.alpha1
Yes, the patch fixes the overlapping labels.
Done.
You already can use integer ranges. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean.
There is already a ticket for this: #1431
|
comment:5
Yes, you are correct - I forgot about that ticket because it's not specifically about matrices. Any reviewer should keep in mind that patch at #4884 has introduced a new way to handle the colormap options, i.e.
and that should probably be incorporated in this patch as well. |
comment:6
For the examples given, this is nice - I have figured out what the purpose in the custom ranges is. One trivial typo - in the sine bicubic example, the srange should be -pi to pi, not -pi to -pi. More weird is the behavior of
which both give extremely narrow plots - because of the aspect_ratio scaling technique, maybe? Anyway, somehow it seems like the idea of a custom range is for labelling purposes (and that's a nice feature), not necessarily for scaling purposes. If it's at least partly for labelling purposes only, a 2x2 matrix probably shouldn't look like this; an aspect ratio of more or less 1 seems most reasonable in that case. |
comment:7
Assuming that #1431 is finished any time soon, an update should use it for implementation. |
comment:8
#9578 might also be relevant. |
CC: @jasongrout @kcrisman
Component: graphics
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/2189
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: