trying another approach for custom grid #386
Conversation
|
@lindsaycarr there is redundant code in here, but this was kind of what I had in mind |
|
all the 👍 this is so much cleaner than what I was implementing (and I branched, so easy to delete!) |
|
Want to take this and streamline it (get rid of the redundancy and other stuff) and add your tests? Curious if it passes your new tests - I didn't try them. |
|
Yes, I can do that. Should I make a branch of yours and do a pull request to your fork when ready? |
| } | ||
| abline(v=at[[as.x_side_name(view.name)]], remove_field(grid.args, "equilogs")) | ||
| } else { | ||
| do.call(graphics::grid, args = append(list('ny'=NA), remove_field(grid.args, "ny"))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we still need to account for the case where either nx=NA or nx=0, and capture our custom tick marks. Maybe?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nevermind, it's by side...
|
@lindsaycarr feel free to pull down this PR (e.g., |
| } | ||
| abline(h=at[[as.y_side_name(view.name)]], remove_field(grid.args, "equilogs")) | ||
| } else { | ||
| do.call(graphics::grid, args = append(list('nx'=NA), remove_field(grid.args, "nx"))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, I see now that this could be the simpler:
grid('nx'=NA, remove_field(grid.args, "nx"))for some reason that doesn't work if you use graphics::grid('nx'=NA, remove_field(grid.args, "nx")), which is what I tried first
adding/cleaning up grid + tests
|
@lindsaycarr got your's in here. I'll leave the merge up to you if you are 👍 |
#384