| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
This makes for a subtle difference; empty scatters won't do any of the bookkeeping that's done for non-empty ones (or even other empty Collection). The main thing there being the open_group/close_group call (which really only affects SVG, I think). I'm not sure we want to introduce that inconsistency over clarifying backend behaviour. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
For that concern, I could have draw() still call open_group()/close_group() instead of completely bailing out right at the beginning. That said, if get_visible() == False already makes draw() bail out before that bookkeeping, does that bookkeeping actually matter for something that is not supposed to actually draw anything? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
"Artist marked as not visible" and "artist with null data" are different. It is worth it's own if block that just does open/close. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Okay, just making sure. Now updated. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Co-authored-by: Elliott Sales de Andrade <quantum.analyst@gmail.com>
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
PR summary
The PR fixes a bug (fixes #32219) with drawing an empty scatter plot creating a PathCollection with an empty offsets list. Renderers can interpret this (incorrectly) as wanting a single marker with no offset rather than no markers. This PR simply bails out of the draw() call when offsets is empty.
Fixes a bug revealed in #32219, where specifying facecolor="none" (or edgecolor="none") went down a different code path than specifying a color. It turns out that specifying "none" would not be understood as a single color – because zero colors is not equal to one color – which would prevent the optimized drawing of a collection when there is just a single path (allowing the use of draw_markers() instead of draw_path_collection()). I'm going to create an issue for this because it opened up a can of worms. Edit: Ah, #17790 already exists, so I have created #32232 for discussion.
AI Disclosure
No AI was used
PR quality check