BUG: fix incorrect xticklabels when specifying xticks (GH11529) #11531
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks for the fix. The fix looks valid (I've overlooked the side effect in #10717). |
jorisvandenbossche
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 9, 2015
BUG: fix incorrect xticklabels when specifying xticks (GH11529)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #11529
@sinhrks in PR #10717 you moved the setting of the ticklabels from
_adorn_subplotsto its own function_post_plot_logic_common. But this is called before_adorn_subplots, and the specifiedxticksare only set in_adorn_subplots, so now it does not use the new xticks to determine the xticklabels.I just switched the order of the two functions. At first sight this seems OK, but do you know if there could be any side effects of switching the order?