Maybe something like TextPlot would be a good merged name? It conveys what the package does (text plots) rather than how it does it (Braille characters).
Having a more complete plotting package for the terminal would move towards having a way to make `plot` just work when you start up a Julia REPL, which I think is a goal. I'd be happy to help merge them, but probably won't have time for a couple weeks. -- Leah On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Adam Smith <[email protected]>wrote: > I'm not totally opposed to it, but my initial reaction is not to: > > 1. I don't necessarily agree about the name. I personally think "dot > plot" has a nice ring to it, and it is a more accurate description of what > it does (using Braille characters). This very specifically exploits Unicode > (non-ASCII) characters, so calling it an ASCII plot would be misleading > (for those who want the restricted character set for some reason). > 2. There's not really a single line of code they have in common, so > there's nothing to "merge": it would just be a rename. I didn't look at the > code of ASCIIPlots before making it, and we chose completely different > APIs. For example, ASCIIPlots doesn't have a way to plot functions, and > DotPlot doesn't (yet) have a way to scatterplot an array. > 3. They are both quite small and simple (dotplot is ~100 lines of > code, ascii is ~250); merging would probably be more work than either > originally took to create. > > > On Thursday, May 22, 2014 1:31:10 AM UTC-4, Ivar Nesje wrote: >> >> Would it make sense to merge this functionality into ASCIIPlots? To me >> that seems like a better name, and John Myles White is likely to be willing >> to transfer the repository if you want to be the maintainer. That package >> started from code posted on the mailing list, and the author thought it was >> a joke. John packaged it for others to use. > >
