From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-13 13:03:41
>[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jake Voytko
>Sent: 13 June 2007 03:01
>Subject: [boost] Progress of Boost.SVG_Plot
>For those who have put time or energy into making suggestions for the
>SVG_Plot program, an update (with pretty pictures!) is on the wiki:
>Feedback / use cases welcome ;). So far it only produces graphs in one
>dimension, but inch by inch it's getting better! Hopefully by
>point, I'll have a working legend system as well as graphs in two
>dimensions, and I hope to take a good chunk out of the list of
>that I've been given! Further into the future, I want to look at the
>animation / hover features that SVG has to offer to see if I can take
>advantage of them for data display purposes and make the output of the
Looking rather good already :-))
Though I suspect that people will have a clearer idea of the implications of the parameters v. stream debate when we have a slightly
fuller example with axes ticks and labels and title etc. Perhaps when you have a bit more fleshed out, you can repost with a title
"Progress of Boost.SVG_Plot - request for views on how to present the graph options."
Personally, I still don't like the use of << at all.
The set functions feel much more intuitive to me, and chaining provides a shortcut if you want, but you don't have to use it. Once
you have an example, it's pretty obvious how to use it. It avoids the need to chose short names for my_plot to cut down repetition.
Does "output" feels better than "write"? No - perhaps write is OK?
my_plot.output("my_image.svg") also feels right to me.
And this actually does the output to file (or elsewhere).
This seems right so you can say:
to get more than one plot?
Keep up the good work :-)
--- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk