-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11.9k
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
Improved code minimization #6362
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, but not sure if _getLabels
is right function to use.
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ module.exports = Scale.extend({ | |||
return me.getRightValue(chart.data.datasets[datasetIndex].data[index]); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
return me.ticks[index - me.minIndex]; | |||
return me._getLabels()[index]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is altering of ticks in ticks.callback
or afterBuildTicks
supported?
me.getTicks()[index].label
instead, in that case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe it wouldn't be supported because there's no other scale that accesses ticks in getLabelForIndex
and this method is only used by the tooltip which a separate concept from ticks. The way we've always suggested customizing the tooltip is via https://www.chartjs.org/docs/latest/configuration/tooltip.html?q=#external-custom-tooltips
I've rebased this PR |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No concerns other than @kurkle's comment. While we don't modify ticks
in afterBuildTicks
, it's possible that someone has. Not sure if that should block this, but we should be aware of it
@kurkle did my response address your concern or do you think I should change it back? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should not assume that category scale is fed with only plain array data. So label index might not be same as data index. Anyway, its not what this PR is trying to do, so I think its fine for now.
@benmccann @etimberg don't forget to rewrite the commit message when merging ("Minor cleanup" isn't helpful), but also add a label and milestone to every merged PR, it really helps to write release notes :) |
Ok. I've renamed to "Improved code minimization" which hopefully helps describe it a bit better |
Thanks! we should make sure to rewrite the commit message (at least the commit title - first line) before merging so the git history (and blaming) contains more interesting information. |
An assortment of random improvements I came across in the past couple days