From: Bruce S. <ba...@an...> - 2000-11-23 21:03:11
|
Some of you may have invoked visual.graph to plot 2D graphs of functions and data with autoscaling. Our own physics students have been using it all this semester, mainly with gcurve (which draws lines between the data points). This week for the first time they used the vertical-bar option, and we found that the names of some of the graphics objects in the package should probably be changed, as proposed here: gvbar -> gvbars (or possibly gvbargraph) ghbar -> ghbars (or possibly ghbargraph) gdot -> gdots (or possibly gdotgraph or gscatter) The way these are used is shown in the following example: mybars = gvbar(color=color.red, delta=0.3) for x in range(100): mybars.plot(pos=(x,y)) The mild problem we encountered was with the name in the singular (gvbar), there was a tendency to think it makes just one vertical bar, so students put both the gvbar constructor and the plot option in the loop, which is inefficient. It seems plausible that using a plural name (gvbars) or a name such as gvbargraph the intent would be clearer. I prefer the shorter version gvbars to gvbargraph. Any comments? I'd like to make this change right away in the context of making a major release of VPython that is compatible with Python 2.0 and which has much improved documentation for Visual. I don't imagine that there are very many programs in existence that use gvbar. Bruce Sherwood |