Hi,
Thanks for your opinion on this. I looked at
> def f():
> from pylab import *
...
> savefig('test.png')
before, but didn't liked the warning - also wondered about other proposed way:
> pylab_mode()
...
> pylab_mode(False)
but it looked really fake to me. I liked the "with" approach, not too
much of extra typing
> with pylab:
...
I made test implementation and it works (including rewritten show
method to automatically number pictures as pylab_<n>.png), but I
noticed one thing - is it intended behaviour in Sage Notebook that
when using any "with", output of all lines are aired to output cell,
while when not using "with" only output of last cell is aired to
output cell? It makes lots of noise when plotting (matplotlib
objects), unless someone assigns those to dummy variables - other
solution would be writing bridge functions calling pylab functions to
draw, but not returning the graphics primitives. Anyway it is like in:
class test_controlled:
def __enter__(self):
True
def __exit__(self,*arg):
True
test = test_controlled()
where
with test:
2+2
3+3
gives
4
6
but in normal cell entering
2+2
3+3
gives
6
If it's intended, it's OK too because that way one can plot multiple
plots in one "with" cell - maybe I will silent the graphics calls only
to hide the noise with informations about matplotlib objects. I
haven't tried the proposed decorator way yet, because it forces
closing whole code in function and adds 3 lines instead of one (2 in
definition, one to call and gather output) - it also requires manually
returning all that is defined inside and could be used in other
places, while in "with" approach, if "a=zeros(3)" is assigned inside,
then it is visible in other cells without changes. Generally "with"
looked more lightweight to me.
Thanks,
Andrzej.
--
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
