[racket] Poll: Does anybody besides Doug use 'plot'?

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Fri Sep 30 12:39:51 EDT 2011

Yes, the other alternative being to make no changes and have it work
(and thus not need to get annoyed and read docs and something else you
weren't planning to do that moment), or to make a change to require
rackplot and some adjustments to how you call the code for added

Either way, you plots get more beautiful.


On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Todd O'Bryan <toddobryan at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think he's saying you could change that to
> (require plot/compat)
> and it would still work.
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Robby Findler
> <robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>> I have some old scripts that I used to build a paper (or maybe just
>> play with some data related to the paper I'm not sure) that contain
>>  (require plot)
>> in them. It would be convenient to me to not break them for when I
>> return to that stuff some day.
>> Robby
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Neil Toronto <neil.toronto at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> At Eli's suggestion, I'm conducting a poll. Does anybody on this list use
>>> the 'plot' module, or know of someone who does?
>>> (I'm specifically excluding Doug Williams and his williams/science PLaneT
>>> package because I already know about that, and I don't want ten replies
>>> pointing it out.)
>>> I'm asking because I have a replacement plot library ready, which has a lot
>>> more features and a richer API, and uses Racket's excellent drawing
>>> libraries. But the new library is not backward-compatible.
>>> We're considering these two options for module names:
>>>  1. The compatibility-breaking option:
>>>    plot: new plot module
>>>    plot/compat: backward-compatible wrapper for the new plot module
>>>  2. The backward-compatible option:
>>>    plot: backward-compatible wrapper for the new plot module
>>>    rackplot: new plot module
>>> (The old plot module is going away completely, to exorcise a lot of evil C
>>> code.)
>>> The issues with each option:
>>>  1. Breaking compatibility breaks past code. We don't know how much past
>>>    code; hence the poll.
>>>  2. Not breaking compatibility too easily breaks future code. Searching
>>>    for "plot" in the manuals returns the old 'plot' module first.
>>> Also, if you have ideas for the name of the new library, reply with them.
>>> 'rackplot' grows on me, but rather like a cheese mold.
>>> Thanks!
>>> Neil T
>>> _________________________________________________
>>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
>> _________________________________________________
>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users

Posted on the users mailing list.