8000 Merge v2x to master by jenshnielsen · Pull Request #5906 · matplotlib/matplotlib · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

Merge v2x to master #5906

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jan 25, 2016
Merged

Merge v2x to master #5906

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
f257244
TST: test that number of ticks adjust with aspect
tacaswell Dec 31, 2015
cefba05
FIX: always use at least 2 ticks and recompute
tacaswell Dec 31, 2015
aac8d6e
TST: hard-code nbins
tacaswell Dec 31, 2015
57623d6
MNT: remove caching of _tick_space
tacaswell Jan 16, 2016
bc359be
DOC: modify examples to fix number of ticks
tacaswell Jan 24, 2016
7cea22c
Merge pull request #5772 from tacaswell/min_nticks
jenshnielsen Jan 25, 2016
5fd10ae
Merge remote-tracking branch 'matplotlib/v2.x' into realmaster
jenshnielsen Jan 25, 2016
f05d1d0
Make sure that we have at least one loc before calculating as suggest…
jenshnielsen Jan 25, 2016
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
FIX: always use at least 2 ticks and recompute 
For extreme aspect-ratio plots the auto ntick logic would decide that
no ticks will fit, leading to divide by 0 issue.

 - In ticker ensure there is always at least on bin
 - Axis do not cache the number of ticks so that if the on-screen
   aspect ratio changes the number of ticks will update correctly.
  • Loading branch information
@tacaswell
tacaswell committed Jan 24, 2016
commit cefba05cc88e441e142a417f9993e4ceaf8095bc
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions lib/matplotlib/axis.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2004,7 +2004,7 @@ def get_tick_space(self):
# is no more than 3:1
size = tick.label1.get_size() * 3
size *= np.cos(np.deg2rad(tick.label1.get_rotation()))
self._tick_space = np.floor(length / size)
return np.floor(length / size)
return self._tick_space


Expand Down Expand Up @@ -2346,5 +2346,5 @@ def get_tick_space(self):
# Having a spacing of at least 2 just looks good.
size = tick.label1.get_size() * 2.0
size *= np.cos(np.deg2rad(tick.label1.get_rotation()))
self._tick_space = np.floor(length / size)
return np.floor(length / size)
return self._tick_space
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion lib/matplotlib/ticker.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1434,7 +1434,7 @@ def set_params(self, **kwargs):
def bin_boundaries(self, vmin, vmax):
nbins = self._nbins
if nbins == 'auto':
nbins = min(self.axis.get_tick_space(), 9)
nbins = max(min(self.axis.get_tick_space(), 9), 1)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this need to be "2" at the end? (Just a wild guess...)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds like a reasonable guess, but I think that at least originally, nbins was a maximum number of intervals, so the maximum number of ticks would be one larger; but all of this is dealing with maxima, not with any guaranteed number.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I stated with 2 and change to 1 for exactly the reason @efiring stated.

scale, offset = scale_range(vmin, vmax, nbins)
if self._integer:
scale = max(1, scale)
Expand Down
0