2010/3/25 slabbe <sla...@gmail.com>: > Hi sage-devel, > > If I want to draw a 3d point of size 100 in Sage, I do : > > sage: point((2,3,4), size=100) > > but for a 2d point, the argument is not the same : > > sage: point((2,3), pointsize=100) > > In the ticket #8599 (which needs review), I propose to change > ``pointsize`` for ``size`` because I think ``pointsize`` is kind of > redundant and ``size`` is not ambiguous since it is an argument of a > function called ``point``. > > If anybody have an counter-argument, please say so before #8599 gets a > positive review by somebody!
-1 to this change. The entire design of the 2d plotting in Sage was from the start meant to be consistent with Mathematica (just like matplotlib's 2d plotting is designed to be similar to MATLAB's). In Mathematica, the option is named "PointSize": http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/ref/PointSize.html I'm OK with allowing both size and pointsize, but do not deprecate pointsize. This will just make it harder for Mathematica users to use Sage. -- William -- William -- 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 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
