Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

tachyon 3d plotting of graphs is still screwy #9716

Closed
williamstein opened this issue Aug 10, 2010 · 7 comments
Closed

tachyon 3d plotting of graphs is still screwy #9716

williamstein opened this issue Aug 10, 2010 · 7 comments

Comments

@williamstein
Copy link
Contributor

This looks like crap:

g = graphs.DodecahedralGraph()
g.plot3d(viewer='tachyon')

but this looks good:

g = graphs.DodecahedralGraph()
show(g.plot3d(engine='tachyon'))

Also, this doesn't work (show a plot) at all:

g = graphs.DodecahedralGraph()
g.plot3d(engine='tachyon')

That's at least 2 bugs / sloppinesses.

CC: @sagetrac-mhampton

Component: graph theory

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/9716

@jasongrout
Copy link
Member

first example

@jasongrout
Copy link
Member

Attachment: plot1.png

Attachment: plot2.png

second example

@jasongrout
Copy link
Member

comment:2

I've uploaded the outputs (for me) of the examples.

plot1.png:

g = graphs.DodecahedralGraph()
g.plot3d(viewer='tachyon')

plot2.png:

g = graphs.DodecahedralGraph()
show(g.plot3d(engine='tachyon'))

Why is the first plot way worse than the second?

@jdemeyer jdemeyer modified the milestones: sage-5.11, sage-5.12 Aug 13, 2013
@sagetrac-vbraun-spam sagetrac-vbraun-spam mannequin modified the milestones: sage-6.1, sage-6.2 Jan 30, 2014
@sagetrac-vbraun-spam sagetrac-vbraun-spam mannequin modified the milestones: sage-6.2, sage-6.3 May 6, 2014
@sagetrac-vbraun-spam sagetrac-vbraun-spam mannequin modified the milestones: sage-6.3, sage-6.4 Aug 10, 2014
@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:7

no problem, I would say

@fchapoton fchapoton removed this from the sage-6.4 milestone Jan 2, 2018
@kcrisman
Copy link
Member

kcrisman commented Jan 6, 2018

comment:8

Agreed, this should be closed.

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:9

ok, then let us set this to positive

@videlec
Copy link
Contributor

videlec commented May 18, 2018

comment:10

closing positively reviewed duplicates

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants