RFC: grand constructor unification

[kristofferc]

RFC: grand constructor unification

[KristofferC]

Some comments after a quick readthrough.

• Regarding renaming of structs, e.g TikzDocument -> Document I am kinda negative. Naming the structs the same as they are in .tex \begin{tikzdocument} makes it easy to know what they refer to. Calling it just Document does not bring the same connotations.

• Regarding Document(elements...; preamble) or Document([elements]; preamble) I am not sure. I kinda like using a vector because it makes it more likely you realize that you can push! more elements into a Document.

• Regarding failing early. Agreed, this should always be done.

In general, the fewer structs we have to introduce, the better. If we really have to introduce Legend, Option, LegendEntry etc. types we can, but I really prefer not to.

[tpapp]

Thanks for the comments. I agree about shortening names, I want to mirror pgfplots names as closely as feasible in order to economize on documentation 😄

This is what I would propose: I rework

1. Coordinates (splitting 3d into Coordinates3, I think it is cleaner)
2. Table
3. Plot
4. Axis

in this order, making a PR for each separately. These are the ones I care most about, and would address #37 and #11.

The rest we will see after this. I agree about avoiding unnecessary vocabulary if we can avoid it.