Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix issue #4928: linear tick generator doesn't round values to needed precision. #4943

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 2, 2017
Merged

Fix issue #4928: linear tick generator doesn't round values to needed precision. #4943

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
775bb3d
Fix issue 4928
jcopperfield Nov 13, 2017
c3b8dd3
Improve: replace toPrecision() in toString() to improve readability.
jcopperfield Nov 14, 2017
ad984be
Fix: logarithmic tick generator doesn't round values to needed precis…
jcopperfield Nov 14, 2017
37bfadb
Fix: rounding tick values didn't work for negative values.
jcopperfield Nov 14, 2017
9466cb5
Add: Core ticks tests
jcopperfield Nov 14, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions src/core/core.ticks.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -80,10 +80,15 @@ module.exports = {
numSpaces = Math.ceil(numSpaces);
}

// Put the values into the ticks array
var precision = 1;
if (spacing < 1) {
precision = Math.pow(10, spacing.toPrecision().length - 2);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would it be equivalent to replace .toPrecision() with .toString()? I think that would make it clearer

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this case I think they both return equal results. Since the code is trying to find the number of significant digits after the decimal point.

niceMin = Math.round(niceMin * precision) / precision;
niceMax = Math.round(niceMax * precision) / precision;
}
ticks.push(generationOptions.min !== undefined ? generationOptions.min : niceMin);
for (var j = 1; j < numSpaces; ++j) {
ticks.push(niceMin + (j * spacing));
ticks.push(niceMin + Math.round(j * spacing * precision) / precision);
}
ticks.push(generationOptions.max !== undefined ? generationOptions.max : niceMax);

Expand Down