|
From: Darren D. <dsd...@gm...> - 2009-05-19 01:05:50
|
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Kern <rob...@gm...> wrote: > On 2009-05-18 19:07, Andrew Straw wrote: > > I've been hacking away at adding support for "dropped spines" to MPL > > (e.g. http://jeb.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/211/3/341/FIG7 ) and > > have come to the conclusion that there is a fundamental issue in the > > code base that the traits package has solved -- many values that depend > > on other values with complicated stuff that happens when one of the > > parent values changes. For example, the location of the text from the > > xaxis depends on the padding value in addition to the xaxis location. > > Now I'm trying to add another element to the mix -- namely an axis spine > > that can change location -- and things are going to spiral into a > > (further) collection of special-cased updates unless there's some > > reworking of the infrastructure. > > > > So, the question is, should I attempt to use traits for this? I guess > > that I won't have the time to re-write the entire code base to use > > traits, but I'd like make a stab a stab at dropped spine support with > > the knowledge that, should I be successful, there's at least a chance we > > would again ship traits with MPL. I imagine we could incrementally move > > more and more to traits if I'm successful, particularly now that we have > > the beginnings of a unit test infrastructure (thanks James!). > > If you do, *please* either depend on Traits or, if you must include the > code in > matplotlib itself, stick it under matplotlib's namespace. We stopped shipping traits with mpl a long time ago, when that issue was identified. > I really don't want to > go back to having to fix people's broken installations again. > Was that comment really necessary? Darren |