[racket] Considering backward-incompatible change to Plot

Unfortunately the algorithms only work in 2D, and probably aren't actually
efficient. I have been meaning to generalize some of them now that Pict3D
exists :) And they would probably serve as reference implementations.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:56 PM Neil Toronto <neil.toronto at gmail.com> wrote:

> That looks like an awesome project. I could probably even use the convex
> hull implementations in Pict3D.
>
> You could use `plot-bitmap` or `plot/dc` as well, FWIW.
>
> I'll count this as a +1, then. :)
>
> Neil ⊥
>
> On 03/17/2015 01:51 PM, Spencer Florence wrote:
> > I've been using plot heavily for
> > https://github.com/florence/convex-hulls, which pulls a bitmap% from the
> > snip% to render it as a gif. As long at the Plot object can get me a
> > bitmap% or its underlying vector, I would love the new interface.
> >
> > or maybe I should just be using `plot-pict`...
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 12:35 PM Neil Toronto <neil.toronto at gmail.com
> > <mailto:neil.toronto at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Plot has been converted to Typed Racket in the upcoming Racket 6.2.
> >
> >     I'm strongly considering taking this opportunity to improve the API.
> The
> >     change is backward-incompatible, however, so I need input from those
> of
> >     you who use Plot a lot.
> >
> >     In particular, recent experience with Pict3D makes it clear that the
> >     type of the `plot` function shouldn't be this:
> >
> >         (-> (Treeof (U nonrenderer renderer2d)) ... (U Void (Instance
> >     Snip%)))
> >
> >     but should be this instead:
> >
> >         (-> (Treeof (U nonrenderer renderer2d)) ... Plot)
> >
> >     where a `Plot` instance is a value that can be queried for its
> >     properties (such as the legend, plot bounds, ticks, etc.) and just
> >     happens to print in DrRacket as an interactive snip. The type of
> >     `plot3d` would be changed to return `Plot3D` instances.
> >
> >     Casual uses wouldn't see any change at all.
> >
> >     However, functions that receive or return plots, *which also put
> >     contracts on plots*, would have to change to use `plot?` instead of
> >     (is-a?/c snip%), or use (require plot/snip), a new compatibility
> module,
> >     instead of (require plot).
> >
> >     How many programs of yours would this change break?
> >
> >     Any objections? Any suggestions?
> >
> >     Neil ⊥
> >     ____________________
> >        Racket Users list:
> >     http://lists.racket-lang.org/__u__sers
> >     <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users>
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20150317/ac2413e1/attachment.html>