invert_xaxis() and friends shouldn't blindly set the axis limits. The autoscaling state should be left unchanged. There may be other places in the codebase where this change should be made.
inverting an axis shouldn't affect the autoscaling setting
Looks good to me.
Is this easy to test? If so, would you mind adding a simple test for this?
Yes, I was just about to push up a commit that tests this, but then I ran into the build failure on my machine.
@WeatherGod "The" build failure? The ones we've been seeing recently on Travis? The travis builds are succeeding now...
Whew ok. That's a relief.
As for "other places in the code that may need this update": I just did a quick grep. hist2d and spy both set the limits unconditionally like this -- I wonder what the implications of adding those are.
Renamed all instances of variables named "long" to "lon" to avoid clo…
…bbering by 2to3
Remove NO_DEPRECATED flag -- this was accidentally committed.
Added a test for #1553
Ok, looks like I accidentally picked up a couple of the cherry-picked commits in my last rebase. Hopefully that isn't too much of an issue.
I will look into spy and hist2d.
wrt spy() and hist2d(), I have to question why they even need to explicitly set the limits. Maybe at the time, the autoscaling logic wasn't very good, but it is much more mature now. Perhaps we should update these to use autoscale_view()?
We can certainly still do the same setting of the limits. I just suggest that the autoscaling state should be left alone.
@WeatherGod Is this good to go or are you going to add hist2d and spy to this PR?
I think I will leave spy and hist2d out. We will have to ponder it some more.
@WeatherGod Ok. Are you needing to add anything or can I merge this?
no, go ahead and merge.