Skip to content

Implemented issue #5856 #6172

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.

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

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from
Closed

Implemented issue #5856 #6172

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

ItsRLuo
Copy link
Contributor

@ItsRLuo ItsRLuo commented Mar 17, 2016

Added a parameter in the argument: orientation that takes "horizontal" or "vertical" like @anntzer suggested.


bottom = kwargs.pop('bottom', None)
label = kwargs.pop('label', None)

markerline, = self.plot(x, y, markerfmt, label="_nolegend_")
if (orientation == "vertical"):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unnecessary parentheses.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@QuLogic Hi I think it need both vertical and horizontal check there or else it will plot marker lines twice, unless you meant a else statement instead of elif like:
if (orientation == 'horizontal'):
...
else:
...

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Parentheses, not condition:

if orientation == 'vertical':

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

This is a duplicate of #6168

Can you please coordinate to get a single PR? I think the general comments I left there also apply to this PR.

@tacaswell tacaswell added this to the 2.1 (next point release) milestone Mar 17, 2016
@ItsRLuo
Copy link
Contributor Author

ItsRLuo commented Mar 17, 2016

opps, didn't realize there was another one until i PRed

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

Are both of you in CSCD01?

There are some things I like better about this version. For example using strings instead of bool leaves a clear(ish) upgrade path to having stem plots that start at the top and go down and start at the right and go left.

attn @vincent-cuenca

@vecuenca
Copy link
Contributor

Yup, looks like we are. I can add in @ItsRLuo's version of the code

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

attn @solvents (the internet tells me you are a TA this year).

We tend to see a number of these concurrent PRs (at least we have in past years). My inclination is requests the students work together on a single PR, but want to make sure that is consistent with what you need from the class side of things.

@solvents
Copy link
Contributor

I don't see a problem with the teams collaborating after submitting their PRs. Usually there is a bonus for completing a pull request, so in this sort of case we'd give the bonus to both teams provided they both contributed fairly to a single PR, I suspect. For evaluation, we mostly look at the work they did before creating the PRs.

If the issue is only having one PR in the first place, it gets a little tricky (part of their learning objective is to research issues to implement independently). I can check with the course instructor if its feasible for us to check for duplicate PRs before they are created. I'll put some kind of update here when I have more information.

@atafliovich
Copy link

Course instructor here. The teams will coordinate on the PR, incorporating all your feedback. Thanks!

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

I do not have a problem with the duplicate PRs coming in. In most cases although they address the same problem they fix it in different and complimentary ways.

I was just checking that I was not causing trouble by asking them to work together once code has hit the internet.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants