It looks like the problem occurs when the major locator puts ticks at intervals of more than a decade. What should the minor ticks do in that case? I don't see an obvious solution, other than putting minor ticks at the decades when the major ticks are skipping decades. In the upper RHS plot in this example, the minor ticks would be at 10^-9 and 10^-7.
Would it be a problem if a minor tick was always drawn at any position a major tick is drawn? (We just need to make sure that the major tick is drawn over the minor tick, if both are present.) This would also have avoided (somewhat) issues such as #6875 (comment).
Would it be possible to decouple label generation from the ticks? There should totally still be major ticks there, but on some of my plots (ylim of 10^-17 to 10^-4) were just way too crowded and ugly. I was in a rush and just posted the first plot that showed it, so maybe not the best example.
We've done a lot of work on the ticker module to improve the defaults recently, so it is possible this has been fixed. Do you mind sharing the data and the code so that I can verify we haven't fixed this already?
@efiring Is this still a problem with 2.1.x? Running your snippet, I get
which looks kind of OK to me (i.e. no funny minor ticks between major y-ticks spanning over more than 1 decade). Or am I missing something?
However kind of agree with the suggestion that adding an extra unlabelled tick at each decade between the labelled tick might be a good idea.
Activity
efiring commented on Sep 29, 2016
It looks like the problem occurs when the major locator puts ticks at intervals of more than a decade. What should the minor ticks do in that case? I don't see an obvious solution, other than putting minor ticks at the decades when the major ticks are skipping decades. In the upper RHS plot in this example, the minor ticks would be at 10^-9 and 10^-7.
anntzer commented on Sep 29, 2016
Would it be a problem if a minor tick was always drawn at any position a major tick is drawn? (We just need to make sure that the major tick is drawn over the minor tick, if both are present.) This would also have avoided (somewhat) issues such as #6875 (comment).
efiring commented on Sep 29, 2016
That would make a mess, or more complexity to avoid the mess, in any case where minor ticks are labeled.
anntzer commented on Sep 29, 2016
Good point.
LindyBalboa commented on Oct 4, 2016
Would it be possible to decouple label generation from the ticks? There should totally still be major ticks there, but on some of my plots (ylim of 10^-17 to 10^-4) were just way too crowded and ugly. I was in a rush and just posted the first plot that showed it, so maybe not the best example.
tacaswell commented on Oct 4, 2016
You might be able to shoe-horn some 'return an empty string' logic into LogFormatter
NelleV commented on Nov 10, 2016
We've done a lot of work on the ticker module to improve the defaults recently, so it is possible this has been fixed. Do you mind sharing the data and the code so that I can verify we haven't fixed this already?
Thanks,
N
efiring commented on Nov 10, 2016
Not fixed on v2.x:
afvincent commented on Nov 17, 2017
@efiring Is this still a problem with 2.1.x? Running your snippet, I get

which looks kind of OK to me (i.e. no funny minor ticks between major y-ticks spanning over more than 1 decade). Or am I missing something?
However kind of agree with the suggestion that adding an extra unlabelled tick at each decade between the labelled tick might be a good idea.
efiring commented on Nov 17, 2017
I think we can consider the behavior sufficiently improved by #8381 that the original issue is no longer present. Therefore I will close this.
LindyBalboa commented on Nov 17, 2017
Thanks for the continuing work guys!