kcrisman wrote:
>
> On Oct 16, 2:29 pm, Francois Maltey <fmal...@nerim.fr> wrote:
>   
>> Hello,
>>
>> Functions plot is fine with singular functions as
>>
>> plot (sin(1/x), x, 0, 5)
>>
>> Plot has also a symbolic option detect_poles=True.
>> But this option isn't designed for theses plots.
>> There are unpleasant vertical lines.
>>
>> plot (floor(10*x), x, 0, 2)
>> plot (x*floor(1/x), x, 0, 2)
>> plot (arctan ((tan(x)^2-1)/(2*tan(x)), x, 0, 2)
>>     
>
> These are cool examples!  I believe there is an 'exclude points'
> option in the pipeline, though I can't remember the Trac number.
>   
It's #6878

If someone comes up with a good heuristic how to detect
discontinuities, we could allow

exclude='automatic'

like Mathematica.
>> I don't think it's too hard to compute about one function call per pixel,
>> and then the mathematic are more respected !
>>     
>
> Well, that's easier said than done - how many points is a pixel?  The
> plotting code doesn't say anything about pixels, I don't believe, and
> setting ridiculously large tolerances is kind of fun to understand how
> the code works.  In general this algorithm does pretty well, though
> plotting tan(x) is annoying still, if you want to fix that without
> using show options.
>
>   
>> It's not pleasant to build a large list of points and then plot theses
>> points (and not the polygonal line) because the speed isn't constant for
>> any curves.
>>     
>
> I'm not sure what you mean.  Are you suggesting we use some sort of
> curved primitives?  A line with that many points is indistinguishable
> from a curve (which Archimedes wouldn't have liked, but some other
> Greeks argued), at least in a plot.
>
> I think the real issue is that you don't want (nearly) vertical lines
> in step-type functions, and this is a legitimate point of contention.
> I think that at least on this side of the pond, step functions with
> vertical lines are considered a legitimate representation of the
> function.  However, perhaps that should be revisited?  Certainly the
> graphs plot produces in such situations look like not the graphs of
> functions, in a technical sense.  However, note that the list of
> points almost assuredly does not actually violate the vertical line
> test!
>
> Opinions from others?
>
> - kcrisman
> >
>   


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to 
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to