Boost logo

Boost :

From: Matt Doyle (mdoyle_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-13 13:27:01

> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jake Voytko
> This is also my own opinion, but I feel that code written
> using the stream
> operator also *looks* cleaner than a monolithic constructor
> call or style
> call to take care of all styling (including background
> color/border, title
> size/color/position, legend background/border/text
> size/position, main plot
> background/border color and size /plot colors / etc)before anything is
> written.
> I absolutely see the value of having the following syntax:
> my_plot << plot_range(data.begin(), data.end(), line_thickness=3,
> point_color=red, line_color=black);

I have to say that I like the streaming style interface. The only drawback that jumps out at me is that every time I look at it, it _feels_ like I would be able to do something like:

svg_plot my_plot("./image.svg");

my_plot << image_size(500, 200) << x_scale(-7, 9) << draw_axis();
for (double i = 1.0; i < 10; i += 1.0)
        my_plot << i;
my_plot << write();

Or can I??

> > > Feedback / use cases welcome ;).

In my situation the data that I might want to visualize isn't directly usable (well, meaningful) without interpolation between the data points. With the combination of the extractor suggested by Matias and support for SVG's Bézier curves then I could output a plot that is more representative of the actual data. I'd also like to second Paul Bristow's suggestion for auto scaling, if I already knew what was in the container then why would I need to "visualize it" :-}


Scanned by McAfee GroupShield {X3BTB534}

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at