Make autoskip aware of major ticks - #6509
Merged
etimberg merged 5 commits intoOct 19, 2019
Merged
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Sorry, something went wrong.
benmccann
force-pushed
the
autoskip
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2b6f0ef to
bbf5ce5
Compare
September 8, 2019 18:00
kurkle
reviewed
Sep 10, 2019
kurkle
left a comment
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a quick look
Sorry, something went wrong.
kurkle
reviewed
Sep 19, 2019
Comment thread
test/specs/scale.time.tests.js
kurkle
reviewed
Sep 19, 2019
Comment thread
test/specs/scale.time.tests.js
etimberg
reviewed
Oct 2, 2019
Comment thread
src/scales/scale.time.js
Comment thread
test/specs/scale.time.tests.js
Comment thread
test/specs/scale.time.tests.js
etimberg
previously approved these changes
Oct 5, 2019
kurkle
previously approved these changes
Oct 7, 2019
Comment thread
src/core/core.scale.js
Outdated
etimberg
previously approved these changes
Oct 9, 2019
kurkle
reviewed
Oct 14, 2019
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some performance / personal preference comments.
Overall this PR seems fine, although I'm unsure how it affects performance in different scenarios.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Comment thread
samples/scales/time/financial.html
Outdated
Comment thread
src/core/core.scale.js
Outdated
Comment thread
src/core/core.scale.js
Outdated
Comment thread
src/core/core.scale.js
Outdated
etimberg
previously approved these changes
Oct 14, 2019
kurkle
reviewed
Oct 15, 2019
kurkle
left a comment
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good. I think couple of new tests for improved functionality would be good.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This was referenced Apr 14, 2020
exwm
pushed a commit
to exwm/Chart.js
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 30, 2021
* Make autoskip aware of major ticks * Address review comments * Fix codeclimate warning * Add test for major and minor tick autoskipping * Revert change for determining _majorUnit and fix sample
This was referenced Jun 1, 2021
Open
This was referenced Jul 5, 2021
This was referenced Jul 27, 2021
This was referenced Oct 14, 2021
1 task
This was referenced Jan 21, 2022
This was referenced Feb 4, 2022
This was referenced Mar 7, 2022
Open
1 task
This was referenced Nov 29, 2022
1 task
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
I'm reopening #6274, which was partially reviewed earlier. I had closed it because I discovered a performance regression. Current master generates only the required ticks / labels. This PR generates a tick at every unit and then runs the auto-skipper to keep only the ones that we need. This has some benefits (see the last bullet below), but caused label generation to be more expensive. However, that is now being addressed by #6508, so I feel comfortable moving forward with this PR again
This PR does the following:
There's a handful of tests that have been changed because they test buildTicks. We're now building more ticks and then skipping the ones we don't need. Since the tests don't take into account the auto-skipping and are looking only at the initial buildTicks step, the results include more ticks.
Interactive examples:
Closes #4600 #4612