[Tex/LaTex] tikzpicture as \newcommand with argument(s)

macrostikz-pgf

I have a tikz barplot which I want as a \newcommand with a variable. Depending on the variable, labels should be added or not. In the document I will use the plot several times, sometimes with, sometimes without labels. Thats why I want it as a command.

here my MWE:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz, pgfplots}
\begin{document}

\newcommand{\myplotWithoutLabels}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xbar, bar shift=0pt, bar width=20pt, xmin=0,
axis x line = none, axis y line* = middle, 
ytick={1,2,3}, tickwidth=0, every tick/.style={draw=none},% label pos, no   tick marks
yticklabels={}
]
\addplot coordinates {(2,1)};
\addplot coordinates {(5,2)};
\addplot coordinates {(4,3)};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}

\myplotWithoutLabels

\newcommand{\myplotWithLabels}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xbar, bar shift=0pt, bar width=20pt, xmin=0,
axis x line = none, axis y line* = middle, 
ytick={1,2,3}, tickwidth=0, every tick/.style={draw=none},
yticklabels={L1, L2, L3}
]
\addplot coordinates {(2,1)};
\addplot coordinates {(5,2)};
\addplot coordinates {(4,3)};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}

\myplotWithLabels
\end{document}

I've tried several things, i.e.:

\newcommand{\myplot}[3]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[title=my Title,
xbar, bar shift=0pt, bar width=20pt, xmin=0,
axis x line = none, axis y line* = middle,
ytick={1,2,3}, tickwidth=0, every tick/.style={draw=none},
yticklabels={#1, #3, #3}
]
\addplot coordinates {(2,1)};
\addplot coordinates {(5,2)};
\addplot coordinates {(4,3)};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}

\myplot[L1,L2,L3]

or with only one (#1) argument. Neither did work.

The solution to this question Problem declaring newcommand with tikzpicture inside didn't help me either.

EDIT:
Thanks for the comments and answers. Now the \newcommand works. However, there is one problem left. The plot generated with the \newcommand with argument is slightly shifted up on the y axis.

Here the code, I've put the two plots next to each other using subcaption package (\usepackage{subcaption}) to see the difference. The plots are both as \newcommand, one without argument, one with argument.

\newcommand{\myplot}[1]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
xbar, bar shift=0pt, bar width=20pt, xmin=0,
axis x line = none, axis y line* = middle,
ytick={1,2,3}, tickwidth=0, every tick/.style={draw=none},
yticklabels={#1}
]
\addplot coordinates {(2,1)};
\addplot coordinates {(5,2)};
\addplot coordinates {(4,3)};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}

\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[h!]{0.45\textwidth}
\myplotWithoutLabels
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[h!]{0.45\textwidth}
\myplot{}
\end{subfigure}
\end{figure}

I can't find the reason for the shift.

Best Answer

You have two choices; which one depends very much on the application.

Remember that if you do

\newcommand{\foo}[3]{...}

then a call to \foo should be of the form

\foo{first}{second}{third}

where each argument is braced. It's not the same as in other programming language: the syntax \foo{first,second,third} would take first,second,third as #1 and TeX would look further for #2 and #3.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz, pgfplots}

\newcommand{\myplotA}[3]{%
  \begin{tikzpicture}
  \begin{axis}[
    xbar,
    bar shift=0pt,
    bar width=20pt,
    xmin=0,
    axis x line = none,
    axis y line* = middle, 
    ytick={1,2,3},
    tickwidth=0,
    every tick/.style={draw=none},% label pos, no   tick marks
    yticklabels={#1,#2,#3},
  ]
  \addplot coordinates {(2,1)};
  \addplot coordinates {(5,2)};
  \addplot coordinates {(4,3)};
  \end{axis}
  \end{tikzpicture}%
}

\newcommand{\myplotB}[1]{%
  \begin{tikzpicture}
  \begin{axis}[
    xbar,
    bar shift=0pt,
    bar width=20pt,
    xmin=0,
    axis x line = none,
    axis y line* = middle, 
    ytick={1,2,3},
    tickwidth=0,
    every tick/.style={draw=none},% label pos, no   tick marks
    yticklabels={#1},
  ]
  \addplot coordinates {(2,1)};
  \addplot coordinates {(5,2)};
  \addplot coordinates {(4,3)};
  \end{axis}
  \end{tikzpicture}%
}

\begin{document}

\myplotA{L1}{L2}{L3}

\bigskip

\myplotB{L1,L2,L3}

\end{document}

As you see in the picture, the output is the same.

Related Solutions

[Tex/LaTex] \newcommand argument confusion

The syntax of \newcommand without an optional argument is the following:

\newcommand{<name>}[<args>]{ <code> }

Where <args> is the number of arguments (ranges from 1-9). Within the <code> part of the definition, each of the arguments is marked with a # sign: so the first argument is #1 the second is #2 etc. So if we create a macro \reverseconcat which has three obligatory arguments and concatenates them in reverse order, we would define it as follows:

\newcommand{\reverseconcat}[3]{#3#2#1} % version 1

And we would use it as follows:

\reverseconcat{A}{B}{C}

which would output "CBA"

Now suppose we wanted our command to make the output bold. To do this we want to add \bfseries in our code. Suppose we did this:

\newcommand{\reverseconcat}[3]{\bfseries#3#2#1} % version 2

If we pass the same arguments to this command however, we run into a problem: the code part acts as if we just typed \bfseries CBA in our document, and since \bfseries is a switch, it will make all following text bold, which is not what we want. So in this case, we need to limit the scope of the \bfseries by adding braces around the code part.

\newcommand{\reverseconcat}[3]{{\bfseries#3#2#1}} % version 3

Now when we pass the same arguments to this command it's as if we typed {\bfseries CBA} in our document, which is what we want.

Now suppose we want our command to have an optional argument. By definition, the optional argument is always the argument designated #1 (i.e. the first argument). However, since the command still has a first argument even if it's left out by the user, we still need to provide a value for it. So the syntax of the command changes:

\newcommand{<name>}[<args>][<first argument value>]{<code>}

Now let's make our reverse concatenation macro take an optional argument that specifies how to format the reversed text. In this case, our new macro will then take four arguments (assuming we still want the 3 arguments we originally had.)

So our new command looks like this:

\newcommand{\reverseconcat}[4][\bfseries]{{#1#4#3#2}}

This macro will behave exactly like version 3 above, so \reverseconcat{A}{B}{C} will output "CBA". Notice, however, that because we've added the optional argument, the numbers used for the reversing part are different: they start at #2 because #1 is the optional argument.

Our new command, however, allows us to specify a different value for the first argument, however, so if we don't want the text to be bold, we can pass \itshape to make it italic:

\reverseconcat[\itshape]{A}{B}{C}

and this will produce "CBA"

As Przemysław Scherwentke says in his answer, you could actually pass anything to this command, not just a formatting command, so if, for example, you forgot the \ on \itshape:

\reverseconcat[itshape]{A}{B}{C}

The output would be "itshapeCBA"

This last example shows that expecting the user to pass a command to another command probably isn't the best idea, since you'd like the example above to produce an error rather than produce incorrect output. But solving that problem here would take us too far afield.

[Tex/LaTex] Problem declaring newcommand with tikzpicture inside

You can use ampersand replacement; however, I'd not use the center environment, for better flexibility (and use \[...\] instead, around the command). You can also simplify the code using matrix of math nodes.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix}

\newcommand{\SES}[3]{%
  \begin{tikzpicture}[every node/.style={midway},ampersand replacement=\&]
  \matrix [matrix of math nodes,column sep=2em, row sep=0em] at (0,0) {
  \node(A) {0} ;
  \& \node(B) {#1} ;
  \& \node(C) {#2} ;
  \& \node(D) {#3} ;
  \& \node(E) {0} ; \\};
  \draw[->] (A) -- (B)  node[anchor=south] {};
  \draw[->] (B) -- (C)  node[anchor=south] {};
  \draw[->] (C) -- (D)  node[anchor=south] {};
  \draw[->] (D) -- (E)  node[anchor=south] {};
  \end{tikzpicture}%
}

\begin{document}

\[
\SES{A}{B}{C}
\]

\end{document}

enter image description here

However, I'd recommend using tikz-cd.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}

\newcommand{\SES}[3]{%
  \begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&]
  0 \arrow[r] \& #1 \arrow[r] \& #2 \arrow[r] \& #3 \arrow[r] \& 0
  \end{tikzcd}%
}

\begin{document}

\[
\SES{A}{B}{C}
\]

\end{document}

enter image description here

With the simplified syntax of tikz-cd you'll probably give up to defining several types of commutative diagrams with macros.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

[Tex/LaTex] \newcommand argument confusion

[Tex/LaTex] Problem declaring newcommand with tikzpicture inside

Related Question