| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
i.e. defaulting to "out". Also support "inout". Would perpendicular work better for "out"? see e.g. demo_curvelinear_grid.
My recollection is that this is to test if the axislabel and the ticklabels are on the same side. If self._ticklabel_add_angle != self._axislabel_add_angle is True, it means that they on different side. In this case, we only need to check if the ticks are on the same side as the axislabel. Also, the second branch of the or should use minor_ticks twice. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I just realized that this is a two-year old PR. It would be still good if this can be merged after some more fix. I can work on it if that is desired. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@leejjoon Feel free to pick it up; it was essentially a proof of concept in reply to #19101. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
For this, I'd like to introduce tickangle_mode. For now, it's argument could be 'auto' (or None), 'normal', and 'parallel'. 'normal' is for perpendicular to the box, 'parallel' is for parallel to gridlines, and 'auto' is 'normal' only if tickdir is 'out'. However, I don't think these are good choice of option names. Any recommendation? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I would perhaps call this tick_orientation={"parallel", "normal", "auto"}. Perhaps @timhoffm can chime in? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Actually superseded by #30369 in the end. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
i.e. defaulting to "out". Also support "inout".
I had this patch lying around, and am only posting it because of #19101 (which this implements). Although tests pass, there are a few remaining points:
The default change (to "out"), as well as the new feature, have to be documented.
There is one point in the old implementation which I do not understand:
I don't understand the conditions in which the pad are zero or nonzero, and don't know either whether the second branch of the or should actually use minor_ticks twice instead of minor_ticks and then major_ticks. Thus I don't know either how the check should be adapted for the "inout" case.
I feel like it would actually look much nicer to have ticks perpendicular to the spines?
attn @jasondet I guess, feel free to pick up the patch.
PR Summary
PR Checklist