Make log ticks formatter selection logic more robust #1731
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
loichuder
approved these changes
Jan 15, 2025
axelboc
force-pushed
the
fix-log-ticks
branch
from
dc722fd to
5599c90
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As explained in #1726 (comment), the log ticks formatter selection logic doesn't work when the domain array is in the wrong order (
[max, min]instead of[min, max]). Ideally this shouldn't happen, and I'll investigate the idea of assertingmin < maxinVisCanvas.Regardless, I'm not happy with the domain-flipping logic
const [min, max] = domain[0] > 0 ? domain : [-domain[1], -domain[0]];. In this PR, I refactor it so it's more robust and explain why we need it at all in a comment. The new logic works with[max, min], because why not: