10
$\begingroup$

Bug introduced in 10.0 and fixed in 10.3

It appears that perhaps the iterator variable r is not Block-ed in the ParametricPlot code below. This does not happen with other Plot* commands nor with Table. The plot is produced successfully, however.

r = {0., 0.5, 1.};
ParametricPlot[r {Cos[t], Sin[t]}, {r, 0, 1}, {t, 0, 2 Pi}]

Thread::tdlen: Objects of unequal length in {0.,0.5,1.} {Cos[t],Sin[t]} cannot be combined. >>

Am I doing something wrong, or is it a bug?

This happens in V10.0.2 and V10.1 (Mac OSX). It does not happen in V9. I came across this in my answer to How to make a ArrayPlot/MatrixPlot in polar coordinates?.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
5
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ It's not a bug. It's a feature called "A New Kind of r" $\endgroup$
    – Dr. belisarius
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 3:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I say it's a bug, introduced in v10. v9 is fine. I'm going to add the tag. Can you report it? Note that Evaluated -> False doesn't fix it, but (very weirdly!) Evaluated -> True does! Exactly the opposite of what I would expect. $\endgroup$
    – Szabolcs
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 3:19
  • $\begingroup$ @Szabolcs I've reported it to WRI. $\endgroup$
    – Michael E2
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 3:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In v9 this doesn't print but in v10 it does: x := Print["x!"]; Plot[x, {x, 0, 1}]. $\endgroup$
    – Szabolcs
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 3:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Szabolcs These are not equivalent, given r = {0., 0.5, 1.}: Plot[r^2 {2, 3}, {r, 0, 1}, Evaluated -> True] and Plot[Evaluate[r^2 {2, 3}], {r, 0, 1}]. I think they should be. I don't know if that's the same bug or even a bug. Evaluated is no longer documented, it seems, so WRI could argue that the discrepancy is unimportant. $\endgroup$
    – Michael E2
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 11:39

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5
$\begingroup$

I assume it is a bug based on the following findings:

  • In v9.0.1 it does not happen.

  • Adding Evaluated -> False does not fix it. Strangely Evaluated -> True does fix it.

  • As you mention, other plotting functions, such as ParametricPlot3D, do not have this problem, regardless of the Evaluated setting.

This is not an answer, just some arguments on why I think it is a bug.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Bug, yes. But, I don't think it's serious as the plotting functions still work, so it is slight evaluation leak. $\endgroup$
    – rcollyer
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 20:20
  • $\begingroup$ @rcollyer What about the x := Print["x!"]; Plot[x, {x, 0, 1}] example (which is slightly different)? In v9 it doesn't leak at all. $\endgroup$
    – Szabolcs
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 20:25
  • $\begingroup$ Right. I was including that. It only prints once, implying the leak is a one time affair; the plot is otherwise unaffected. So, annoying, but not serious. $\endgroup$
    – rcollyer
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 20:29
  • $\begingroup$ @rcollyer Agreed, just wanted to check it's really a bug. $\endgroup$
    – Szabolcs
    Commented Apr 14, 2015 at 20:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Szabolcs, Dear Szabolcs, your package MaTex has the V10 syntax <||>, so I'd like to know that how to revise it to make this package could be applied in the ealier version. Thanks:) $\endgroup$
    – xyz
    Commented Apr 15, 2015 at 7:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.