Fixed the expected output from test_arrow_patches.test_fancyarrow. #1682
Conversation
Regenerated from test output.
|
G'day! Cheers for the pull request. @mdboom should have visibility of this before merging. That bbox_inches test is on and off for me locally. Sometimes I get the failure and sometimes I don't and I can't seem to find a way to consistently reproduce it. |
|
Urrgh, bbox_inches_test. Yeah, I've had it fail when I was testing my other branch (fixing the image comparison). From what I've seen, it's just subtle repositioning of the text, but it's hard to tell on Travis. I've addressed it in my other branch by bumping up the tolerance for that case. I don't think it should block merging this PR, since clearly I can't have made it any worse by changing the expected output of another test. |
|
Yeah I agree. As you're already aware, image testing is rather complicated as it is. I appreciate the work you've put in to all of it. It takes a strong will and a pinch of insanity to tackle such a gargantuan task and you've done a great job. Thanks. |
|
Yeah. I didn't realise how hard it would be when I started. :) |
|
Actually, on looking at the diff, this should very clearly be merged! The test image should actually contain fancy arrows. D'oh. |
…atches Fixed the expected output from test_arrow_patches.test_fancyarrow.
|
Hmm... the real question is why the fancy arrow test appeared as it did (empty) on my machine when I made the new baseline images. I guess if it happens again, the test will fail, and I'll know... |
|
FYI: It happened again when you generated the anti-aliased ones... |
Regenerated from test output.
This fixes Issue #1681.