| Unhappy plotter [message #48192] |
Thu, 06 April 2006 15:41  |
Cliff
Messages: 11
Registered: April 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
In the beginning I used add ons to Fortran to visualise my data, so
when I came across PV-WAVE it was like a miracle appearing on my
desktop. Then came IDL, widgets, pointers etc etc. I was a happy
plotter. I started to write applications and soon found direct graphics
a little clunky. Then came objects - much more like it and I was a
anticipative plotter. Then came object graphics, oops, it was like the
wind was knocked from my sails. Why oh why are they so complicated?
Then I found MATLAB, this is how graphics should work. Make a plot and
you have a functional oo plotting system - like LIVE_PLOT on acid. I
jumped with joy in anticipation when I heard of the arrival of iTools.
Ooops, why oh why oh why? Complicated, indecipherable and unusable
unless of course one has a spare month or two for the learning curve
(my boss would not be happy). Suppose I'll have to carry on using DGs
for my applications. Am I just dim? It's not like I'm an IDL novice.
Does anyone else feel this way? oh and why can't object methods be used
as widget events. Moan over ...
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48324 is a reply to message #48192] |
Fri, 07 April 2006 09:51  |
Michael Galloy
Messages: 1114
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Cliff wrote:
> In the beginning I used add ons to Fortran to visualise my data, so
> when I came across PV-WAVE it was like a miracle appearing on my
> desktop. Then came IDL, widgets, pointers etc etc. I was a happy
> plotter. I started to write applications and soon found direct graphics
> a little clunky. Then came objects - much more like it and I was a
> anticipative plotter. Then came object graphics, oops, it was like the
> wind was knocked from my sails. Why oh why are they so complicated?
> Then I found MATLAB, this is how graphics should work. Make a plot and
> you have a functional oo plotting system - like LIVE_PLOT on acid. I
> jumped with joy in anticipation when I heard of the arrival of iTools.
> Ooops, why oh why oh why? Complicated, indecipherable and unusable
> unless of course one has a spare month or two for the learning curve
> (my boss would not be happy). Suppose I'll have to carry on using DGs
> for my applications. Am I just dim? It's not like I'm an IDL novice.
> Does anyone else feel this way? oh and why can't object methods be used
> as widget events. Moan over ...
I appreciate the sentiment about the iTools, though I'm being slowly
converted. Even extending the iTools, which I thought was very painful
in IDL 6.0, doesn't seem so bad now in IDL 6.2. (Is this proof you can
get used to anything?)
It's annoying that XMANAGER can't call an object method as an event
handler, but it's certainly easy to get around. What bothers you about it?
-Mike
michaelgalloy.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48326 is a reply to message #48192] |
Fri, 07 April 2006 09:08 |
Rick Towler
Messages: 821
Registered: August 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
liamgumley@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm not a Matlab user, but a while back I spent some time looking at
> the documentation for the Matlab handle graphics suite. It really looks
> very simple, straightforward, and powerful.
Everything looks greener from the other side of the fence...
About a year and a half ago I started working in a MATLAB shop. I had
always wanted to spend some real time with MATLAB and now I had the
chance. Someone opened the (very expensive) gate and guess what? The
lawn on the other side has just as many brown spots, mole mounds, and
doo doo piles.
From a programmer's perspective, I think IDL's OG are superior to ML's
HG. IDL's object API is superior. I hear Michael and others groaning,
but the truth is while not complete it is sufficient and most
importantly easy to use. Maybe it is just me, but I always feel
constrained (and a bit confused) when writing classes in MATLAB. In
IDL, I was composing classes in literally minutes under David's tutelage.
To be fair, ML's HG aren't bad. The biggest advantage (and I guess this
is pretty big, I have been waiting for this from RSI for *years*) is
that the HG system has a lot of "value added". Mathworks doesn't just
give you the bricks, but full blown houses. RSI gave us the atoms and
took a "If you build it, they will come" attitude and, well, very few
people have come.
But at the end of the day they both have their warts. MATLAB doesn't
pass by reference, doesn't have keywords nor pointers, and is *really*
expensive. IDL's IDE is lacking (especially non-windows platforms), the
GUI builder is weak, and it's OG library is limited.
To bring this back to the iTools discussion, for those of you that
haven't used MATLAB, the iTools are, IMO, RSI's attempt to provide an
interface similar to MATLAB's figure. And let's be honest, this is
sorely needed in IDL. I think the problem is that RSI went from one
extreme (atoms) to the other (iPlot, iSurface, iImage) and I think the
majority of IDL users live somewhere in between wanting something with
the ease of the direct graphics system and the power of the object
graphics system. While some of us have made attempts, we the users
can't really do it. iTools has shown us that some of this needs to be
implemented internally. I wish I would have had the vision to see this
back during the 6.0 alpha...
It will be interesting to see where all of this goes. I for one will
stay around, not because of the iTools, but because (despite the warts)
when I need to do 3d, IDL is the best game in town. But since now I
need to do some quick and dirty 2d plots from the command line, I'm
firing up MATLAB.
-Rick
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48331 is a reply to message #48192] |
Fri, 07 April 2006 04:07 |
Jo Klein
Messages: 54
Registered: January 2006
|
Member |
|
|
Hi David, hi folks,
David Fanning wrote:
> To tell you the truth, though, I think my run with IDL
> is almost over. I'm not interested in iTools and the
> direction IDL is going these days. I haven't renewed
> my maintenance contract, and see no particular reason
> to do so. There hasn't been much new in IDL that
> excites me or the people I work with in quite some time.
Sad as it is, I do share your sentiment. I recently bought maintenance
because I had to move to a different environment, and thus upgraded from
5.3 to 6.2. There is hardly anything new that I missed in the old
version, which is quite a shame when you think what an antiquated
version of IDL I had been using all these years. For me, the basic
operations are what makes life easy - things like extra DIMENSION
keywords and so on, and there are a few of these in 6.2, but not for all
routines where you would expect it (why can I dim max, but not mean?). I
don't need Object Graphics or iTools, and Matlab does indeed do a good
job at certain graphics-related things - such as being able to produce a
decent, resizable correlation plot from a matrix without me having to
set a myriad of keywords.
For me, IDL is just a means to an end - I use it to solve my everyday
imaging problems and write small widget application that others can use
as well, and I'm not happy spending all that money on maintenance when I
don't see any useful additions. Not even the DE is up to modern
standards - NEdit does a better job at highlighting syntax, brackets and
such than the expensive original.
Maybe I shall bite the bullet and defect to the Matlab side of the iron
fence ...
Sorry for the rant,
Jo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48332 is a reply to message #48192] |
Fri, 07 April 2006 02:56 |
liamgumley
Messages: 74
Registered: June 2005
|
Member |
|
|
I'm not a Matlab user, but a while back I spent some time looking at
the documentation for the Matlab handle graphics suite. It really looks
very simple, straightforward, and powerful. It is designed to be driven
from the command line. If someone could write a graphics library for
IDL which emulated the Matlab handle graphics suite, I think they would
gain eternal fame.
Here's some more information:
http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/techdoc/creati ng_plots/hg_objec.html#27602
Cheers,
Liam.
Practical IDL Programming
http://www.gumley.com/
Cliff wrote:
> In the beginning I used add ons to Fortran to visualise my data, so
> when I came across PV-WAVE it was like a miracle appearing on my
> desktop. Then came IDL, widgets, pointers etc etc. I was a happy
> plotter. I started to write applications and soon found direct graphics
> a little clunky. Then came objects - much more like it and I was a
> anticipative plotter. Then came object graphics, oops, it was like the
> wind was knocked from my sails. Why oh why are they so complicated?
> Then I found MATLAB, this is how graphics should work. Make a plot and
> you have a functional oo plotting system - like LIVE_PLOT on acid. I
> jumped with joy in anticipation when I heard of the arrival of iTools.
> Ooops, why oh why oh why? Complicated, indecipherable and unusable
> unless of course one has a spare month or two for the learning curve
> (my boss would not be happy). Suppose I'll have to carry on using DGs
> for my applications. Am I just dim? It's not like I'm an IDL novice.
> Does anyone else feel this way? oh and why can't object methods be used
> as widget events. Moan over ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48335 is a reply to message #48192] |
Thu, 06 April 2006 18:22 |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Andrew Cool writes:
> We've expressed our interest in Catalyst to you.
> But you've yet to provide proof of the pudding...
Yes, it's a problem... :-(
It seems an iffy financial investment. *Everyone* would
be interested in it for free, I guess. But I have already
invested two years of work in it, and it would take another
six months, probably, to get it ready for someone else to use.
And every time I start to work on it, tuition dollars start
flashing in front of my eyes.
If you have a suggestion that will help turn it into cash,
I'm all ears. It's tough to see something this useful go
to waste.
To tell you the truth, though, I think my run with IDL
is almost over. I'm not interested in iTools and the
direction IDL is going these days. I haven't renewed
my maintenance contract, and see no particular reason
to do so. There hasn't been much new in IDL that
excites me or the people I work with in quite some time.
Catalyst is old school. RSI will, I think, never provide decent
fonts for direct graphics applications. What's the point
of finishing it? I could invest another $50K of my time
to finish it and reap the $50 a year I average in PayPal
contributions, but I think my poor wife has had enough.
I'd be further ahead, I think, going back to science
communication, a field I *thought* I was starting out
in 20 years ago. If you had a job for a science writer/editor
there in Aussie you can bet I would be all over it!
At one time I thought I could never just close the web
page and logout of this newsgroup. But now, I'm not so
sure. I've been looking for a new job. If it comes along,
I think I am out of here. I'll leave this job to Antonio
and Robbie and all those other young guys who find iTools
so exciting. :-)
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48340 is a reply to message #48192] |
Thu, 06 April 2006 16:01 |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Cliff writes:
> In the beginning I used add ons to Fortran to visualise my data, so
> when I came across PV-WAVE it was like a miracle appearing on my
> desktop. Then came IDL, widgets, pointers etc etc. I was a happy
> plotter. I started to write applications and soon found direct graphics
> a little clunky. Then came objects - much more like it and I was a
> anticipative plotter. Then came object graphics, oops, it was like the
> wind was knocked from my sails. Why oh why are they so complicated?
> Then I found MATLAB, this is how graphics should work. Make a plot and
> you have a functional oo plotting system - like LIVE_PLOT on acid. I
> jumped with joy in anticipation when I heard of the arrival of iTools.
> Ooops, why oh why oh why? Complicated, indecipherable and unusable
> unless of course one has a spare month or two for the learning curve
> (my boss would not be happy). Suppose I'll have to carry on using DGs
> for my applications. Am I just dim? It's not like I'm an IDL novice.
> Does anyone else feel this way? oh and why can't object methods be used
> as widget events. Moan over ...
The gulag is growing. Maybe I'll have to dust that
Catalyst Library off after all. Easy, understandable,
and object methods as widget events. Sounds better and
better, doesn't it. :-)
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48399 is a reply to message #48192] |
Wed, 19 April 2006 16:43 |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Cliff writes in support of my lost faith in IDL:
> I hope that whatever you decide to do that you have all the success and
> one day come up with the killer app that can allow you the luxury to do
> the things you want to do just for fun.
Well, that was plan A. I'm on to plan B, property management,
now. :-)
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Unhappy plotter [message #48401 is a reply to message #48324] |
Wed, 19 April 2006 14:42 |
Cliff
Messages: 11
Registered: April 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Sorry about the initial rant that started this mini-debate, I'm usually
quite positive about things (honestly). I suppose the main problem
that frustrates me is not having the time (like David and his Catalyst
library) to invest in learning the iTools system.
I am sad, David, to hear that you are losing faith in IDL. I was
fortunate to attend one of your courses in the UK and besides the
Coyote Tales was most struck with your enthusiasm. I suppose the crux
of the issue is that we're all in some way trying to earn a living and
time is also money.
I hope that whatever you decide to do that you have all the success and
one day come up with the killer app that can allow you the luxury to do
the things you want to do just for fun.
All the best
Cliff
Michael Galloy wrote:
> Cliff wrote:
>> In the beginning I used add ons to Fortran to visualise my data, so
>> when I came across PV-WAVE it was like a miracle appearing on my
>> desktop. Then came IDL, widgets, pointers etc etc. I was a happy
>> plotter. I started to write applications and soon found direct graphics
>> a little clunky. Then came objects - much more like it and I was a
>> anticipative plotter. Then came object graphics, oops, it was like the
>> wind was knocked from my sails. Why oh why are they so complicated?
>> Then I found MATLAB, this is how graphics should work. Make a plot and
>> you have a functional oo plotting system - like LIVE_PLOT on acid. I
>> jumped with joy in anticipation when I heard of the arrival of iTools.
>> Ooops, why oh why oh why? Complicated, indecipherable and unusable
>> unless of course one has a spare month or two for the learning curve
>> (my boss would not be happy). Suppose I'll have to carry on using DGs
>> for my applications. Am I just dim? It's not like I'm an IDL novice.
>> Does anyone else feel this way? oh and why can't object methods be used
>> as widget events. Moan over ...
>
> I appreciate the sentiment about the iTools, though I'm being slowly
> converted. Even extending the iTools, which I thought was very painful
> in IDL 6.0, doesn't seem so bad now in IDL 6.2. (Is this proof you can
> get used to anything?)
>
> It's annoying that XMANAGER can't call an object method as an event
> handler, but it's certainly easy to get around. What bothers you about it?
>
> -Mike
> michaelgalloy.com
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
