The grapher has been defined as an image compositor.
Oops.
:)
Symptoms:
-- Render an animated .gif to have an animated graph.
-- show(A + B) ('plus'? That's a BLIT. Also, the syntax is
inconsistent. It changes from "add the functions A and B" *precisely* where
the graph object fails to have any meaningful mathematical input, and
instead requires "the composition of A && B". Complete change of context,
at the wrong time.)
-- all the parameters which (should) belong to the grapher are instead
duplicated in the various plot() methods. They overlap, and there are then
*additional* routines to sort out the overlap. e.g. "show axes", "aspect
ratio".
-- Where there are *not* routines to sort it out, the behavior is equally
odd. If the "xmin" and "xmax" values are different for two plot() calls,
only parts of the function show, when they are added to the same image.
All but *one* definition of *display range* is accidentally converted to a
*function evaluation* range.
-- the solve method is not properly separated from the display method.
implicit_plot(), plot(), parametric_plot(). But the coordinate space is,
in reality, completely independent of the method used to solve the equation.
This seems like a situation where Python could maybe benefit from your
expertise. Is it possible to talk to the Python developers about replacing
some of the default methods and definitions over time, if they are
incorrectly matched to the relationships they are designed to describe? I
can't see how it is possible to realize the desired improvements to
Interact, with an image Blitter. :-(
--
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
