[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__
From: |
Kai Habel |
Subject: |
Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__ |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:39:55 +0200 |
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:17:57 +0200
> Von: David Bateman <address@hidden>
> An: kahacjde <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
> Betreff: Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__
> kahacjde wrote:
> > So for example:
> >
> > patch(rand(4,1),rand(4,1),'blue','FaceColor','red')
> >
> > is valid and plots a blue patch
> I just reread that.. Then there is no use setting the FaceColor property
> at all as the original color argument takes precedence. This is not how
> I implemented it, and the last argument in the list takes precedence..
> Should we respect this treatment of the properties? I'd prefer not to....
>
> D.
Argh, actually
patch(rand(4,1),rand(4,1),'blue','FaceColor','red')
plots a *red* patch, so an additional 'FaceColor' would precede the required
color argument. So, you have implemented it the right way.
Kai
- patch: Invalid call to __patch__, Matthias Brennwald, 2007/09/24
- patch: Invalid call to __patch__, Matthias Brennwald, 2007/09/24
- Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, David Bateman, 2007/09/24
- Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, kahacjde, 2007/09/24
- Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, Kai Habel, 2007/09/24
- Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, David Bateman, 2007/09/24
- Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, kahacjde, 2007/09/25
- Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, David Bateman, 2007/09/25
- Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__, David Bateman, 2007/09/25
- Re: [unclassified] Re: patch: Invalid call to __patch__,
Kai Habel <=
patch: Invalid call to __patch__, Matthias Brennwald, 2007/09/24