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

Fit to viewport cleanup #1806

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Feb 3, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@danlipsa
Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

No description provided.

danlipsa added some commits Jan 14, 2016

BUG: Set wrong lat_0 for -3 polar (non gctp) projection
Fail to recognize that ym,yM are not the min/max for
axis Y, but just the bounds for this axis.
Very misleading notation, by the way.
Rename xm, xM, ym, yM to x1, x2, y1, y2 for project.
Those are margins for increasing or decreasing sequences not bounds.
So m is not less than M as suggested by the previous notation.
@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@aashish24 @doutriaux1 Now we only use dataset bounds to do the parallel projection and draw the contours and continents. Markings and labels are a little off as they still use gm bounds. We could merge this as is and start working on replacing marking and labels with VTK axis. This would save us a couple of days of work. I understand this is the plan anyway. What do you think?

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@doutriaux1 @aashish24 I am very curious about the lambert test on macs - I enable it because the failure I have seen (not the segfault) was happening because the outline and continents were off. Now this is done differently so lets see what happen.

@doutriaux1

This comment has been minimized.

Member

doutriaux1 commented Jan 28, 2016

@danlipsa i would like to replace vthe whole template.plot with a real vtk backend! It would be so much nicer! But there are a LOT of subtleties in there (user custom axes labels, log scaling etc...) so we will have to be very careful when doing this.

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@doutriaux1 I am sure it won't be easy. Depending on how long it will take to add the new markings and labels in we might want to fix the labels now even if we know we are going to replace this code in the near future. I'll talk to @aashish24 about this as we have a meeting at 11.

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@doutriaux1 @aashish24 just confirmed that the VTK work is going to be longer as it involves some other things so I'll go ahead and work on fixing the labels for now.

@doutriaux1

This comment has been minimized.

Member

doutriaux1 commented Jan 28, 2016

@danlipsa yes I think it's the best approach for now.

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Jan 28, 2016

@doutriaux1 Seems some mac buildbots are stuck. On one of them, the lambert test passed.

@danlipsa danlipsa force-pushed the fit-to-viewport-cleanup branch 2 times, most recently from 6288311 to 05d7469 Feb 1, 2016

@danlipsa danlipsa force-pushed the fit-to-viewport-cleanup branch from 05d7469 to 80d8e36 Feb 2, 2016

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Feb 2, 2016

@doutriaux1 @aashish24 Please review. I think the trickiest change is the one in vectorpipeline.py. In there we overlap a vector plot over a boxfill plot. Given that these have different bounds I had to adjust the viewport where the vector plot ends up so that the two plots align properly. Note the mac buildbots are stuck.

@doutriaux1

This comment has been minimized.

Member

doutriaux1 commented Feb 2, 2016

@danlipsa restarted macbots

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Feb 2, 2016

Thanks @doutriaux1. lambert tests look a lot better on macs with the new code. @aashish24 @doutriaux1 Are you guys OK with adding new baselines for these failures? Some labels move a little maybe because of a difference in floating point calculations or maybe of a bug in proj4. I don't think it is worth looking into why.

@doutriaux1

This comment has been minimized.

Member

doutriaux1 commented Feb 2, 2016

@danlipsa why are the ticks so up high on mac? (which is what the tests fail).

@danlipsa

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

danlipsa commented Feb 3, 2016

@doutriaux1 Not sure. It may have to do with the different proj4 behavior on macs. Given that aeqd is not right anyway, I would suggest adding new baselines for these tests and taking another look with the new proj4 which I remember fixes some aeqd stuff.

@aashish24 aashish24 referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2016

Closed

Fix projected click #1811

@aashish24

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

aashish24 commented Feb 3, 2016

  • We will disable the troubling tests
  • We will fix the taylor plot

doutriaux1 added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2016

@doutriaux1 doutriaux1 merged commit cd00543 into master Feb 3, 2016

6 of 8 checks passed

cont-int/LLNL/Darwin-Mac (FULL) 'ctest -j4 -D Experi' (Tue Feb 2 13:11:15 2016)
Details
cont-int/LLNL/Darwin-Mac (NOGUI) 'ctest -j4 -D Experi' (Tue Feb 2 12:51:37 2016)
Details
cont-int/LLNL/Darwin-Mac LEAN 'ctest -j4 -D Experi' (Tue Feb 2 11:52:24 2016)
Details
cont-int/LLNL/Linux-RH6 (MESA) 'ctest -j12 -D Exper' (Tue Feb 2 12:07:42 2016)
Details
cont-int/LLNL/Linux-Ub. 15.10 (FULL/MESA) 'ctest -j15 -D Exper' (Tue Feb 2 12:29:41 2016)
Details
continuous-integration/kitware-buildbot/uvcdat-garant-linux-release/ Build done.
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details

@doutriaux1 doutriaux1 deleted the fit-to-viewport-cleanup branch Feb 3, 2016

@aashish24 aashish24 referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2016

Closed

Fix the taylor diagram #1812

@aashish24

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

aashish24 commented Feb 3, 2016

Yay! Hopefully we won't have branches in future with so many baselines updates. I keep saying this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment