Skip to content
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

[BUG] aspect_ratio in conflict with xlims for PGFPlotsX #4835

Closed
jywu20 opened this issue Oct 22, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

[BUG] aspect_ratio in conflict with xlims for PGFPlotsX #4835

jywu20 opened this issue Oct 22, 2023 · 1 comment
Labels

Comments

@jywu20
Copy link

jywu20 commented Oct 22, 2023

Details

When aspect_ratio and xlims are used together, the former will be ignored by the PGFPlotsX backend.

using Plots
pgfplotsx()

let xs = 1:0.1:10
    plot(xs, xs.^2, xlims = (0, 10), aspect_ratio = :equal)
end

gives
捕获
which is the same as the case without aspect_ratio = :equal.

The problem doesn't exist with GR backend.

Backends

This bug occurs on ( insert x below )

Backend yes no untested
gr (default)
pythonplot
plotlyjs
pgfplotsx x
unicodeplots
inspectdr
gaston

Versions

Plots.jl version: 1.39.0
Backend version (]st -m <backend(s)>): 1.6.0
Output of versioninfo():

Julia Version 1.9.3
Commit bed2cd540a (2023-08-24 14:43 UTC)
Build Info:
  Official https://julialang.org/ release
Platform Info:
  OS: Windows (x86_64-w64-mingw32)
  CPU: 8 × 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-1165G7 @ 2.80GHz
  WORD_SIZE: 64
  LIBM: libopenlibm
  LLVM: libLLVM-14.0.6 (ORCJIT, tigerlake)
  Threads: 1 on 8 virtual cores
Environment:
  JULIA_EDITOR = code
  JULIA_NUM_THREADS =
@jywu20 jywu20 added the bug label Oct 22, 2023
@jywu20
Copy link
Author

jywu20 commented Oct 22, 2023

I realized this is a duplicate of #4766. The problem can be worked around by exactly the same way mentioned there.

@jywu20 jywu20 closed this as completed Oct 22, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant