From: Fernando P. <fpe...@gm...> - 2010-02-19 04:50:32
|
Howdy On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Jae-Joon Lee <lee...@gm...> wrote: > > I thought there is no master and slave for an axis-sharing? > If that's the case, maybe "sharex=True" should be suffice? I defer to your wisdom here: I had no clue about this, so I went for the clumsier API. If you are right, it would also make the implementation much simpler, as I had to play some not-totally-obvious gymnastics to alter axis creation order based on this parameter. One more, related question: is it possible/reasonable to share *both* x and y axes? It would be really nice if you were correct. The api could be nicer and the implementation simpler. > Also, how about "subplots" returns a some kind of object so that we > may define some methods on it. We can define "__iter__" method so > that above syntax also works. As an example, > > mysubplots = subplots(4,1, sharex=True) > mysubplots.label_outer() > ax1, ax2, ax3, ax4 = mysubplots Mmh, more than I have time for right now, I'm afraid (I'm really pushing it with these little side-trips already). But if you do have a minute to do it, run with it. I can only commit to finish the basic implementation with the changes discussed above, plus any fixes to share* based on clarifying these points. A fancier object API would be great to have, so by all means go ahead if you have the bandwidth! Cheers, f |