Cartesian small domain #3404
Cartesian small domain #3404
Conversation
| @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ module.exports = function handlePositionDefaults(containerIn, containerOut, coer | |||
| // in the axes popover to hide domain for the overlaying axis. | |||
| // perhaps I should make a private version _domain that all axes get??? | |||
| var domain = coerce('domain', dfltDomain); | |||
| if(domain[0] > domain[1] - 0.01) containerOut.domain = dfltDomain; | |||
| if(domain[0] > domain[1] - 0.001) containerOut.domain = dfltDomain; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why 0.001 rather than even smaller, or dependent on height or width? Actually there’s a downside to depending on dimensions, that would mean some plots break if we export them smaller, particularly to make a thumbnail. So I’d maybe shrink the condition so small it’ll ALWAYS be less than a pixel for any reasonable graph size, and then test that nothing breaks if we really do make an axis that small (even if it can’t be seen).
| @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ module.exports = function handlePositionDefaults(containerIn, containerOut, coer | |||
| // in the axes popover to hide domain for the overlaying axis. | |||
| // perhaps I should make a private version _domain that all axes get??? | |||
| var domain = coerce('domain', dfltDomain); | |||
| if(domain[0] > domain[1] - 0.001) containerOut.domain = dfltDomain; | |||
| if(domain[0] > domain[1] - (1 / 32768.0)) containerOut.domain = dfltDomain; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where does that 32768 number come from?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(No need for the trailing .0 in JS by the way)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
32768 = 2 ^ 15 is ofcourse the maximum signed short seems to be the maximum width/height on Chrome.
After more research I noticed this npm module updated today with good info! According to that we may reduce that to something like 16,384 for FF. Older versions of IE have lower limits.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Interesting. Thanks for the info!
I don't adding a dependency for this is worth it. I suggest finding the max of min values listed.
Inspecting
looks like 1 / 4096 will be good enough.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks! Maybe you could put a comment above this line explaining where that 4096 comes from.
|
Ok. Nicely done 💃 |
Fix #3403