Skip to content

Update diagram in subplots_adjust documentation to clarify parameters #30029

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 9, 2025

Conversation

Bindi003
Copy link

@Bindi003 Bindi003 commented May 9, 2025

PR summary

This pull request addresses an issue in the documentation for where the diagram incorrectly implied that the left, right, top, and bottom parameters were distances from the nearest subplot edges. In reality, these parameters represent distances from the edges of the figure (the overall plotting area).

  • Why is this change necessary?
    The current diagram is misleading and contradicts the correct usage of subplots_adjust, potentially causing confusion for users trying to control subplot layout.

  • What is the reasoning for this implementation?
    The implementation involves updating the Python script (doc/_embedded_plots/figure_subplots_adjust.py) that generates the diagram embedded in the documentation. The plotting code has been modified to accurately represent the relationship between the subplots_adjust parameters and the figure edges, matching the function's actual behavior.

PR checklist

Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for opening your first PR into Matplotlib!

If you have not heard from us in a week or so, please leave a new comment below and that should bring it to our attention. Most of our reviewers are volunteers and sometimes things fall through the cracks.

You can also join us on gitter for real-time discussion.

For details on testing, writing docs, and our review process, please see the developer guide

We strive to be a welcoming and open project. Please follow our Code of Conduct.

@QuLogic
Copy link
Member

QuLogic commented May 9, 2025

This appears incorrect:
image
The origin for all the parameters is the bottom left, not the top right.

@timhoffm
Copy link
Member

timhoffm commented May 9, 2025

Yes should be something like this image

@Bindi003
Copy link
Author

Bindi003 commented May 9, 2025

Hi @QuLogic @timhoffm I've addressed the feedback on the diagram and pushed the updated code. Hopefully, it should now be correct. This is my first contribution, so I appreciate your guidance! Thank you!

@@ -17,14 +18,14 @@ def arrow(p1, p2, **props):

arrow((0, 0.75), (0.1, 0.75)) # left
arrow((0.435, 0.25), (0.565, 0.25)) # wspace
arrow((0.1, 0.8), (1, 0.8)) # right
arrow((0, 0.8), (0.9, 0.8)) # right
Copy link
Member

@story645 story645 May 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looking at the function and function calls, I think the arrow function adds in an unncessary layer of indirection given that the only argument actually passed in is the point. I think here it would be a lot clearer to just do:

arrowprops=dict(arrowstyle="<->", shrinkA=0, shrinkB=0)
xycoords = 'figure fraction'

overlay.annotate("", (0, 0.75), (0.1, 0.75)), xycoords=xycoords, arrowprops=arrowprops)
overlay.annotate("",(0.435, 0.25), (0.565, 0.25)  , xycoords=xycoords, arrowprops=arrowprops)
overlay.annotate("", (0, 0.8), (0.9, 0.8), xycoords=xycoords, arrowprops=arrowprops)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @story645 , thanks for the suggestion! I've updated the code to use the direct overlay.annotate() calls as you recommended :)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@story645 I disagree. I intentionally introduced the arrow function as a semantic wrapper. I still find annotate("", xy1, xy2) a really awkward API. This is basically the discussion of #29826 (which is only deferred because we need to agree what the underlying artist should be), and the need for a reasonable high-level API still persists.

I'm not quite happy with reverting the wrapper, but since this is only an internal helper script and does not show up prominently in the docs, it's not worth fighting over.

Copy link
Member

@story645 story645 May 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, but I also think doc examples are not the place to introduce new API. In this example, the extra arrow function to me felt very distracting once I figured out it wasn't doing anything extra. I would say here if anything then ConnectionPatch should just be used explicitly or the arrow function here should be wrapping ConnectionPatch.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not intoducing new API and the code is not user-facing or teaching by intent. In my perspective, it's just a helper function making the example more readable for editors of that code. Obviously, YMMV. Let's not get into the discussion right now.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, is kinda how I read `intentionally introduced the arrow function as a semantic wrapper. I still find annotate("", xy1, xy2) a really awkward API."

@timhoffm timhoffm modified the milestones: v3.10.4, v3.10-doc May 9, 2025
@timhoffm timhoffm merged commit f7051b5 into matplotlib:main May 9, 2025
22 checks passed
meeseeksmachine pushed a commit to meeseeksmachine/matplotlib that referenced this pull request May 9, 2025
meeseeksmachine pushed a commit to meeseeksmachine/matplotlib that referenced this pull request May 9, 2025
@timhoffm
Copy link
Member

timhoffm commented May 9, 2025

Thanks @Bindi003 and congratulations on your first contribution to Matplotlib 🎉! We'd be happy to see you again.

rcomer added a commit that referenced this pull request May 9, 2025
…029-on-v3.10.3-doc

Backport PR #30029 on branch v3.10.3-doc (Update diagram in subplots_adjust documentation to clarify parameters)
rcomer added a commit that referenced this pull request May 9, 2025
…029-on-v3.10.x

Backport PR #30029 on branch v3.10.x (Update diagram in subplots_adjust documentation to clarify parameters)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Doc]: matplotlib.figure.Figure.subplots_adjust figure
4 participants