Skip to content

fix minor grid overlapping #11762

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 1 commit into from
Aug 10, 2018
Merged

fix minor grid overlapping #11762

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
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
49 changes: 48 additions & 1 deletion lib/matplotlib/tests/test_ticker.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ def test_basic(self):
ax.minorticks_on()
test_value = np.array([0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.45,
0.5, 0.55, 0.65, 0.7, 0.75, 0.85, 0.9,
0.95, 1, 1.05, 1.1, 1.15, 1.25, 1.3, 1.35])
0.95, 1.05, 1.1, 1.15, 1.25, 1.3, 1.35])
assert_almost_equal(ax.xaxis.get_ticklocs(minor=True), test_value)

# NB: the following values are assuming that *xlim* is [0, 5]
Expand All @@ -97,6 +97,53 @@ def test_low_number_of_majorticks(
ax.xaxis.set_minor_locator(mticker.AutoMinorLocator())
assert len(ax.xaxis.get_minorticklocs()) == expected_nb_minorticks

limits = [(0, 1.39), (0, 0.139),
(0, 0.11e-19), (0, 0.112e-12),
(-2.0e-07, -3.3e-08), (1.20e-06, 1.42e-06),
(-1.34e-06, -1.44e-06), (-8.76e-07, -1.51e-06)]

reference = [
[0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.45, 0.5, 0.55, 0.65, 0.7,
0.75, 0.85, 0.9, 0.95, 1.05, 1.1, 1.15, 1.25, 1.3, 1.35],
[0.005, 0.01, 0.015, 0.025, 0.03, 0.035, 0.045, 0.05, 0.055, 0.065,
0.07, 0.075, 0.085, 0.09, 0.095, 0.105, 0.11, 0.115, 0.125, 0.13,
0.135],
[5.00e-22, 1.00e-21, 1.50e-21, 2.50e-21, 3.00e-21, 3.50e-21, 4.50e-21,
5.00e-21, 5.50e-21, 6.50e-21, 7.00e-21, 7.50e-21, 8.50e-21, 9.00e-21,
9.50e-21, 1.05e-20, 1.10e-20],
[5.00e-15, 1.00e-14, 1.50e-14, 2.50e-14, 3.00e-14, 3.50e-14, 4.50e-14,
5.00e-14, 5.50e-14, 6.50e-14, 7.00e-14, 7.50e-14, 8.50e-14, 9.00e-14,
9.50e-14, 1.05e-13, 1.10e-13],
[-1.95e-07, -1.90e-07, -1.85e-07, -1.75e-07, -1.70e-07, -1.65e-07,
-1.55e-07, -1.50e-07, -1.45e-07, -1.35e-07, -1.30e-07, -1.25e-07,
-1.15e-07, -1.10e-07, -1.05e-07, -9.50e-08, -9.00e-08, -8.50e-08,
-7.50e-08, -7.00e-08, -6.50e-08, -5.50e-08, -5.00e-08, -4.50e-08,
-3.50e-08],
[1.21e-06, 1.22e-06, 1.23e-06, 1.24e-06, 1.26e-06, 1.27e-06, 1.28e-06,
1.29e-06, 1.31e-06, 1.32e-06, 1.33e-06, 1.34e-06, 1.36e-06, 1.37e-06,
1.38e-06, 1.39e-06, 1.41e-06, 1.42e-06],
[-1.435e-06, -1.430e-06, -1.425e-06, -1.415e-06, -1.410e-06,
-1.405e-06, -1.395e-06, -1.390e-06, -1.385e-06, -1.375e-06,
-1.370e-06, -1.365e-06, -1.355e-06, -1.350e-06, -1.345e-06],
[-1.48e-06, -1.46e-06, -1.44e-06, -1.42e-06, -1.38e-06, -1.36e-06,
-1.34e-06, -1.32e-06, -1.28e-06, -1.26e-06, -1.24e-06, -1.22e-06,
-1.18e-06, -1.16e-06, -1.14e-06, -1.12e-06, -1.08e-06, -1.06e-06,
-1.04e-06, -1.02e-06, -9.80e-07, -9.60e-07, -9.40e-07, -9.20e-07,
-8.80e-07]]

additional_data = list(zip(limits, reference))

@pytest.mark.parametrize('lim, ref', additional_data)
def test_additional(self, lim, ref):
fig, ax = plt.subplots()

ax.minorticks_on()
ax.grid(True, 'minor', 'y', linewidth=1)
ax.grid(True, 'major', color='k', linewidth=1)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wouldn't something like

ax.grid(which="both", axis="y")  # or ax.grid(True, which="both", axis="y")

be enough to replace the 2 calls to `ax.grid`` (as one does not need the bare eye checking step here)? But even if that is the case, not really worth blocking the PR for so little IMHO...

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, I guess for the test itself we do not actually need any grid; this is more for the case that something goes wrong to easily see what it is. The point is, the previously present test should actually have made this issue apparent for anyone visualizing it with a grid - because it already had one number too much in it. So maybe keeping the grid in might help people looking at this in the future?

ax.set_ylim(lim)

assert_almost_equal(ax.yaxis.get_ticklocs(minor=True), ref)


class TestLogLocator(object):
def test_basic(self):
Expand Down
6 changes: 4 additions & 2 deletions lib/matplotlib/ticker.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2535,8 +2535,10 @@ def __call__(self):
tmin = ((vmin - t0) // minorstep + 1) * minorstep
tmax = ((vmax - t0) // minorstep + 1) * minorstep
locs = np.arange(tmin, tmax, minorstep) + t0
cond = np.abs((locs - t0) % majorstep) > minorstep / 10.0
locs = locs.compress(cond)
mod = np.abs((locs - t0) % majorstep)
cond1 = mod > minorstep / 10.0
cond2 = ~np.isclose(mod, majorstep, atol=0)
locs = locs.compress(cond1 & cond2)

return self.raise_if_exceeds(np.array(locs))

Expand Down