how do you get the new canvas with matplotlib 1.0? I installed it today, but from matplotlib.rcsetup.all_backends I don't get any item which looks like html5 canvas
Maurizio On 14 Lug, 10:03, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Maurizio <maurizio.gran...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi > > >> Very interesting. > > >> 1. How does the speed of the Sage notebook running locally on your > >> computer compare to Spyder locally on your computer? > > > I don't think they can be comparable, doing so different functions... > > Anyway I always use notebook from a server in the local network (which > > is anyway pretty fast). And I still fear that my python installation > > in the windows virtual machine is somehow broken because the ipython > > console is much slower than the plain python console. By the way, some > > time ago we managed to run spyder letting it use the sage console as > > interpreter, which was kind of fun, but never used it extensively. > > Basically what we did was to install spyder on the server hosting > > SAGE, and then running Spyder logging on that machine from our > > workstation and exporting the display. That has been a very > > interesting experiments, but later I had little occasion to use it, > > and the notebook is still more comfortable for touch and go. > > >> 2. Are the plotting issues you mention the result of Spyder embedding > >> static png images (like the sage notebook does) or something more > >> subtle. The sage notebook might switch to HTML5 canvas rendering > >> soon.... I say might, because after having tried it a bunch, I'm > >> seriously concerned that HTML5 canvas matplotlib is slow -- > >> surprisingly, maybe much slower than using png's and image maps, which > >> we should have at least enabled long ago. > > > Yes, they embed static png images with image maps (if I understand > > what you refer to), which is standard matplotlib output nicely put > > inside a Spyder subwindow. The problem is that I strongly dislike this > > output form, I consider it like a fake form of interaction. Some time > > ago, we were considering to spend a little amount of time in writing a > > HTML5 canvas for matplotlib, but we stopped because of (apart not > > knowing how to interface with a server) doubts about matplotlib > > structure. > > As of matplotlib-1.0, there is now an HTML5 canvas for matplotlib. I > played around with it a bunch on Sunday. It'll be in Sage soon enough. > > > > > What I mean is that matplotlib is designed so that its > > canvas is just translating a bunch of lines and points and other > > graphical objects into something that is understood by the target > > viewer. To enhance real interaction, IMHO, the best way would be to > > pass to the viewer also an idea of the hierarchical structure of the > > plot, so that the viewer by itself is capable of changing basic > > properties like "axis visibiliy", "plot line colour", etc. At this > > point, I hope we were wrong and that HTML5 canvas that has been > > developed can overcome these problems. Anyway, I think that doing > > everything on the server side and letting the client only plot the > > received data may be too much communication overhead, while there are > > a number of different javascript viewers which are pretty powerful and > > fast. > > >> 3. I have talked with people about making a Matlab-clone-ish version > >> of the Sage notebook. This would be web-based, but instead of feeling > >> Mathematica-like, it would feel much more Matlab-like. Thoughts? > > > I think that SAGE-python can be easily accepted by Matlab users > > because of intrinsic similarity of scripting language structure, > > console interaction, and stuff like that. The problem is that Matlab > > is very reliable for operations like vector manipulation (which > > require additional interaction with numpy in SAGE), data analysis > > (there are many potential toolboxes in scipy) and symbolic analysis > > (for which SAGE is growing, but still very far from industrial-level > > reliability). > > On the filter design side, I agree that is very useful and often used, > > and I can tell that scipy has the signal toolbox which incorporates > > some functions to do this. I think that most of the engineering > > appealing that SAGE can show is currently strongly supported by numpy/ > > scipy power: if SAGE can be better integrated with them, and if we can > > improve their functions, things will improve for engineers. > > > At the moment, there may be very little advantage of using SAGE > > instead of plain python to interface with numpy/scipy, which are > > anyway the core toolboxes needed. > > Yes, that's what engineers think. > > -- > William Stein > Professor of Mathematics > University of Washingtonhttp://wstein.org -- 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
