You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(33) |
Dec
(20) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(44) |
Mar
(51) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(43) |
Jun
(36) |
Jul
(61) |
Aug
(44) |
Sep
(25) |
Oct
(82) |
Nov
(97) |
Dec
(47) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(77) |
Feb
(143) |
Mar
(42) |
Apr
(31) |
May
(93) |
Jun
(93) |
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(78) |
Sep
(56) |
Oct
(44) |
Nov
(72) |
Dec
(75) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(116) |
Feb
(99) |
Mar
(181) |
Apr
(171) |
May
(112) |
Jun
(86) |
Jul
(91) |
Aug
(111) |
Sep
(77) |
Oct
(72) |
Nov
(57) |
Dec
(51) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(64) |
Feb
(116) |
Mar
(70) |
Apr
(74) |
May
(53) |
Jun
(40) |
Jul
(519) |
Aug
(151) |
Sep
(132) |
Oct
(74) |
Nov
(282) |
Dec
(190) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(141) |
Feb
(67) |
Mar
(69) |
Apr
(96) |
May
(227) |
Jun
(404) |
Jul
(399) |
Aug
(96) |
Sep
(120) |
Oct
(205) |
Nov
(126) |
Dec
(261) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(136) |
Feb
(136) |
Mar
(119) |
Apr
(124) |
May
(155) |
Jun
(98) |
Jul
(136) |
Aug
(292) |
Sep
(174) |
Oct
(126) |
Nov
(126) |
Dec
(79) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(109) |
Feb
(83) |
Mar
(139) |
Apr
(91) |
May
(79) |
Jun
(164) |
Jul
(184) |
Aug
(146) |
Sep
(163) |
Oct
(128) |
Nov
(70) |
Dec
(73) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(235) |
Feb
(165) |
Mar
(147) |
Apr
(86) |
May
(74) |
Jun
(118) |
Jul
(65) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(162) |
Oct
(94) |
Nov
(48) |
Dec
(44) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(49) |
Feb
(40) |
Mar
(88) |
Apr
(35) |
May
(52) |
Jun
(69) |
Jul
(90) |
Aug
(123) |
Sep
(112) |
Oct
(120) |
Nov
(105) |
Dec
(116) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(76) |
Feb
(26) |
Mar
(78) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(61) |
Jun
(53) |
Jul
(147) |
Aug
(85) |
Sep
(83) |
Oct
(122) |
Nov
(18) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(58) |
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(49) |
Apr
(17) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(39) |
Jul
(53) |
Aug
(52) |
Sep
(35) |
Oct
(47) |
Nov
(110) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(50) |
Feb
(93) |
Mar
(96) |
Apr
(30) |
May
(55) |
Jun
(83) |
Jul
(44) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(5) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
(7) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
1
(5) |
2
(2) |
3
(4) |
4
|
5
|
|
6
(4) |
7
(6) |
8
(7) |
9
(2) |
10
(8) |
11
(5) |
12
(3) |
|
13
(1) |
14
|
15
(11) |
16
(10) |
17
(3) |
18
(5) |
19
(6) |
|
20
(2) |
21
(2) |
22
(8) |
23
|
24
(2) |
25
(16) |
26
(37) |
|
27
(15) |
28
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: Michael A. <m_a...@ya...> - 2011-02-12 22:11:51
|
Greetings!
First, my personal thanks to you good folks who make
a wonderful tool like matplotlib available.
I am currently trying to build matplotlib-1.0.1 against
libpng1.5.1, and _png.cpp failed to compile. Apparently,
libpng's info_ptr is now opaque, so the code required
multiple changes of this nature:
-- _png.cpp.orig 2011-02-12 16:42:42.000000000 -0500
***************
*** 350,362 ****
png_set_sig_bytes(png_ptr, 8);
png_read_info(png_ptr, info_ptr);
! /*png_uint_32 width = info_ptr->width;*/
! /*png_uint_32 height = info_ptr->height;*/
! png_uint_32 width = png_get_image_width( png_ptr, info_ptr );
! png_uint_32 height = png_get_image_height( png_ptr, info_ptr );
! /*int bit_depth = info_ptr->bit_depth;*/
! int bit_depth = png_get_bit_depth( png_ptr, info_ptr );
// Unpack 1, 2, and 4-bit images
if (bit_depth < 8)
--- 350,359 ----
png_set_sig_bytes(png_ptr, 8);
png_read_info(png_ptr, info_ptr);
! png_uint_32 width = info_ptr->width;
! png_uint_32 height = info_ptr->height;
! int bit_depth = info_ptr->bit_depth;
// Unpack 1, 2, and 4-bit images
if (bit_depth < 8)
***************
Sorry to be sending problems :-).
I suspect you have probably noticed this
already, but just in case I figured I'd send
a "head's up". Thanks!
Sincerely,
Mike Albert
|
|
From: Benjamin R. <ben...@ou...> - 2011-02-12 21:08:32
|
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Benjamin Root <ben...@ou...> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jae-Joon Lee <lee...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> Dear Matplotlib developers,
>>
>> Attached is a patch to improve the functionality of legend.
>> The two biggest changes are as follows,
>>
>> * Drawing of legend is delegated to "legend handlers".
>> * Introduces a new "Container" class. This is primarily to support
>> legend of complex plots (e.g., bar, errorbar, etc).
>>
>> The first change is to ease the creation of customized legends. See
>> "legend_demo_custom_handler.py" for example.
>> The second change is to support legend of complex plots. Axes
>> instances now have a "containers" attribute. And this is only intended
>> to be used for generating a legend. For example, "bar" plots create a
>> series of Rectangle patches. Previously, it returned a list of these
>> patches. With the current change, it creates a container object of
>> these rectangle patches and return it instead. As the container class
>> is derived from a tuple, it should be backward-compatible.
>> Furthermore, the container object is added to the Axes.containers
>> attributes. And legend command use this "container" attribute to
>> properly create a legend for the bar.
>>
>> A two example figures are attached.
>>
>> As this patch introduces relatively significant changes. I wanted to
>> get some comments from others before I commit.
>> The change will be divided into four commits.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -JJ
>>
>>
> Nice. I will look through it this week and see if I can break it.
>
> Ben Root
>
>
Jae-Joon,
I finally got around to doing some testing with your refactor of legend. I
find the concepts behind the refactor interesting, however the current
implementation doesn't seem to work properly in some basic use-cases.
In particular, the following just produces an empty box:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
x = [1,2,3,4,5]
y1 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
y2 = [5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
plt.plot(x, y1, 'rx-')
plt.plot(x, y2, 'bx-')
plt.legend(('a', 'b'))
plt.show()
However, it does work if I use the label= kwarg in the plot commands.
Another use-case that doesn't seem addressed yet (and isn't quite right in
regular mpl either) is legends for stemplots.
I haven't tried out the new features yet, as I am mostly concerned about
backwards-compatibility right now.
Ben Root
|
|
From: Nicholas D. <mis...@gm...> - 2011-02-12 03:07:02
|
As suggested on http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/faq/howto_faq.html#submit-a-patch , I have submitted this to the patch tracker an am following it up, with a tracker link! The patch tracker entry is: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3178834&group_id=80706&atid=560722 Apologies if I am sticking rigidly (and annoyingly) to this process. (I have also been observing the git-transition, so appreciate this probably isn't the best time to integrate random patches) On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:23 AM, Nicholas Devenish <mis...@gm...> wrote: > One of the things that bugs me about axes.hist is that with > histtype='step' the automatic legend style is an empty box, instead of > a line, as I would expect. This behaviour doesn't seem to make sense, > because it seems a line would be much more appropriate for this case. > Example is attached for the code: > > import matplotlib.pyplot as plt > plt.hist([0,1,1,2,2,2], [0,1,2,3], histtype='step', label="histtype='step'") > plt.legend() > plt.show() > > I can get around this by using proxy Line2D objects in building the > legend, but as this is an extremely common operation for me (the > common style of histograms in my field is equivalent to step) this > becomes messy and annoying. I'd rather not have to roll my own > histogram drawing function, as it would be almost entirely duplicating > the axes hist code, and don't know another way to get what I want. I > understand that the way of setting Legend styles is something that has > been looked at recently, but don't know the timescale for any changes. > > The cause of this is the fact that in axes.py::7799 (current SVN > head), in axes.hist, patch objects are always created, even for the > line-based step style. I searched the tracker briefly, and couldn't > find this mentioned before. I therefore have a few questions: > > - Is this intended behaviour, that I am just not understanding the > requirement for? > - Would changing this to create (and thus return) Line2D's instead of > Patch's for this histtype be a horrible breaking of the return > interface? > > I've attached a patch that makes the simple change of swapping out the > call to .fill for .plot (only the function is changed here, not yet > the documentation), and it appears to work but I haven't tested > exhaustively. > > Thoughts? > > Nick > |