It's a good idea. But a big number of arguments is confusing a lot. may be instead of a large set of arguments in a function it's better to implement something like a style-class?
On Sunday, April 15, 2012 11:22:02 PM UTC+3, Aaron Meurer wrote: > > It would probably be cleaner to make plot() call the explicit > functions, not the other way around. > > Aaron Meurer > > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:39 AM, krastanov.ste...@gmail.com > <krastanov.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think its better to have explicit names like plot_3d, plot_2d instead > of > >> having a > >> single plot function. > > > > I agree. I would like to have explicit plot_blah_blah with explicit > > arguments (free variables and ranges) and one implicit plot() with all > > the magic and guessing for the arguments. At the moment the explicit > > stuff can be added with oneliners. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "sympy" group. > > To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en. > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sympy/-/NJqj2bbovrYJ. To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
