| Re: CONTOUR: how to get rid of that zero tick name? [message #71177] |
Mon, 07 June 2010 16:10 |
![Paul Van Delst[1] is currently offline](theme/default/images/xoffline.png.pagespeed.ic.XRkd1fkXye.png "Paul Van Delst[1] is currently offline")
Paul Van Delst[1]
Messages: 1157
Registered: April 2002
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Fanning wrote:
> Paul van Delst writes:
>
>> While it's true that careful reading of the manual reveals the solution, I reckon the
>> fault lies with the keyword names themselves. I mean, what would one intuitively expect a
>> keyword called "XTICKS" to specify?? *Especially* when the other tick-related keywords are
>> tick related, not ticket-interval related.
>>
>> It's one of those annoying special-case situations where you either have to remember the
>> rules, or continually RTFM.
>
> I've been waiting all day for this to come up. But
> I didn't want to get into it. I have my own problems
> with a misspent youth. :-(
Misspent youth!?!? Mate, I'm still waiting for the wisdom light to come on (insert
Reinhold Niebuhr quote here). What I need right now, as Frank Costanza exclaimed, is
SERENITY NOW!
:o)
cheers,
paulv
|
|
|
|
| Re: CONTOUR: how to get rid of that zero tick name? [message #71178 is a reply to message #71177] |
Mon, 07 June 2010 15:26  |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Paul van Delst writes:
> While it's true that careful reading of the manual reveals the solution, I reckon the
> fault lies with the keyword names themselves. I mean, what would one intuitively expect a
> keyword called "XTICKS" to specify?? *Especially* when the other tick-related keywords are
> tick related, not ticket-interval related.
>
> It's one of those annoying special-case situations where you either have to remember the
> rules, or continually RTFM.
I've been waiting all day for this to come up. But
I didn't want to get into it. I have my own problems
with a misspent youth. :-(
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Sepore ma de ni thue. ("Perhaps thos speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
| Re: CONTOUR: how to get rid of that zero tick name? [message #71179 is a reply to message #71178] |
Mon, 07 June 2010 15:12 |
Paul Van Delst[1]
Messages: 1157
Registered: April 2002
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Timm Weitkamp wrote:
> On Jun 7, 3:28 pm, David Fanning <n...@dfanning.com> wrote:
>> Timm Weitkamp writes:
>>> I would like to make a CONTOUR plot with self-defined tick names, like
>>> in this example (where the x tick names are user-defined):
>>> IDL> contour, dist(3), [-1,0,1], [-1,0,1], xticks=3, xtickv=[-1,0,1],
>>> xtickname=['a', 'b', 'c']
>>> That should work, I thought. But it doesn't. What happens is tha IDL
>>> overplots a zero ("0") over the "b". (See screenshot of the plot at
>>> <http://www.sendspace.com/file/0uhh4q>.)
>>> Does this happen on other IDL installations than mine? Is it a bug? A
>>> feature? And, above all: how can I get rid of this behavior? Any help
>>> appreciated.
>> You have a mismatch between the number of tick *intervals*
>> you specify (with TICKS) and the number of tick names
>> you provide. If you provide three tick names, then you
>> only want two tick intervals. If you put XTICKS=2 this
>> will work the way you expect it to work.
>
> Oops. Reading the manual more carefully would have helped. Sorry, and
> thank you!
While it's true that careful reading of the manual reveals the solution, I reckon the
fault lies with the keyword names themselves. I mean, what would one intuitively expect a
keyword called "XTICKS" to specify?? *Especially* when the other tick-related keywords are
tick related, not ticket-interval related.
It's one of those annoying special-case situations where you either have to remember the
rules, or continually RTFM.
cheers,
paulv
p.s. I'm only grousing about it because I made exactly the same error today.
p.p.s. While this aspect of IDL's plotting interface was undoubtedly settled very early
on, I think me reading Donald Norman's "The Design of Everyday Things" back in the '90s
has made me rather intolerant of poorly designed interfaces.
|
|
|
|
| Re: CONTOUR: how to get rid of that zero tick name? [message #71196 is a reply to message #71179] |
Mon, 07 June 2010 06:39 |
Timm Weitkamp
Messages: 66
Registered: August 2002
|
Member |
|
|
On Jun 7, 3:28 pm, David Fanning <n...@dfanning.com> wrote:
> Timm Weitkamp writes:
>> I would like to make a CONTOUR plot with self-defined tick names, like
>> in this example (where the x tick names are user-defined):
>
>> IDL> contour, dist(3), [-1,0,1], [-1,0,1], xticks=3, xtickv=[-1,0,1],
>> xtickname=['a', 'b', 'c']
>
>> That should work, I thought. But it doesn't. What happens is tha IDL
>> overplots a zero ("0") over the "b". (See screenshot of the plot at
>> <http://www.sendspace.com/file/0uhh4q>.)
>
>> Does this happen on other IDL installations than mine? Is it a bug? A
>> feature? And, above all: how can I get rid of this behavior? Any help
>> appreciated.
>
> You have a mismatch between the number of tick *intervals*
> you specify (with TICKS) and the number of tick names
> you provide. If you provide three tick names, then you
> only want two tick intervals. If you put XTICKS=2 this
> will work the way you expect it to work.
Oops. Reading the manual more carefully would have helped. Sorry, and
thank you!
Timm
|
|
|
|
| Re: CONTOUR: how to get rid of that zero tick name? [message #71197 is a reply to message #71196] |
Mon, 07 June 2010 06:28 |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Timm Weitkamp writes:
> I would like to make a CONTOUR plot with self-defined tick names, like
> in this example (where the x tick names are user-defined):
>
> IDL> contour, dist(3), [-1,0,1], [-1,0,1], xticks=3, xtickv=[-1,0,1],
> xtickname=['a', 'b', 'c']
>
> That should work, I thought. But it doesn't. What happens is tha IDL
> overplots a zero ("0") over the "b". (See screenshot of the plot at
> <http://www.sendspace.com/file/0uhh4q>.)
>
> Does this happen on other IDL installations than mine? Is it a bug? A
> feature? And, above all: how can I get rid of this behavior? Any help
> appreciated.
You have a mismatch between the number of tick *intervals*
you specify (with TICKS) and the number of tick names
you provide. If you provide three tick names, then you
only want two tick intervals. If you put XTICKS=2 this
will work the way you expect it to work.
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
