Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fix by etpinard · Pull Request #1519 · plotly/plotly.js

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard · 2017-03-27T16:17:28Z

Currently

vardata=[{x: [5,NaN,15,20,NaN,21],y: [20,NaN,23,25,NaN,26],type: 'bar'}];Plotly.newPlot('myDiv',data);

generates

which is wrong.

With this PR, we get

- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T14:57:21Z

+ cd.push({ p: p, s: s });
+ } else {
+ cd.push({ p: p });
+ }


Nice. Do we need to merge in the base loop below too?

Maybe? The behavior now is similar to how scatter fills in its arrayOk attributes. I can double check though.

Looks like scatter keeps a 1:1 mapping between calcdata points and the input arrays, filling in non-numerics with {x: false, y: false} - that's a good point about other arrayOK attributes, maybe it would be easier to keep that 1:1 mapping for bars too? Should be faster too, as we're not doing repeated .push, can set the size of cd at the start.

I prefer removing non-numeric items in the calc step, so that we don't have to do that during the plot step (e.g. on zoom).

OK, but then how do you want to solve this for bar color arrays etc? save the original index in each cd element? cd.push({p: p, s: s, i: i}) or something? That would need to be propagated all the way through to Lib.mergeArray which seems like a bit of a disaster.
Non-numerics should be regarded as an edge case, so the overhead of managing their objects shouldn't be seen as a concern, but you're right to worry about the overhead of checking each valid point. That said, this works for scatter which can have way more points than bars, so I think as long as we make this test super simple it shouldn't be a problem.

@alexcjohnson ok, you convinced me.
With commit 0144f06 bar calcdata has now a 1-1 correspondence with the bar (x,y) coordinates. Note that non-numeric bar items are cleaned up in bar/plot.js and makeCalcdata (called above the serieslen loop in bar/calc.js) sets non-numeric values to BADNUM.
This a pretty big change that might lead to regressions, so this PR will make be part of the next minor release v1.26.0 only.

- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

- see #1369 for why that was needed.

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T20:55:35Z

+ var cd = gd.calcdata;
+ assertPointField(cd, 'x', [[0, 1, 2, 3]]);
+ assertPointField(cd, 'y', [[1, NaN, NaN, 15]]);
+ });


do we have a test with a bad x but good y for the same point?

Good call. Added in 6f0a95d

alexcjohnson · 2017-03-28T22:36:29Z

Nice - big improvement. At some point we may want to make sure we have tests that throw some garbage or partially garbage points into ALL our trace types - perhaps just add some junk to various image test mocks that shouldn't impact the images - but it's great that we've locked this down for bars now. 💃

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

etpinard added 2 commits March 27, 2017 11:59

make toBeCloseToArray and toBeCloseToArray2D handle NaN properly
b62529d
- as `NaN === NaN // => false`

set bar size in main serieslen loop
5279f99
- so that item with non-numeric (x,y) are excluded from the calcdata.

etpinard added status: reviewable bug something broken labels Mar 27, 2017

etpinard changed the title ~~Bar with non-numeric (x.y) items bug fix~~Bar with non-numeric (x,y) items bug fixMar 27, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

etpinard added 2 commits March 28, 2017 16:05

fill in non-numeric bar items in calcdata
0144f06
- as per AJ's recommendation - and skip over them in setPositions - use BADNUM constant to skip over non-numeric items (recall: non-numeric values are set to BADNUM in makeCalcdata)

rm bar (now useless) 'placeholder' logic
042cc82
- see #1369 for why that was needed.

etpinard added this to the v1.26.0 milestone Mar 28, 2017

alexcjohnson reviewed Mar 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

add non-numeric 'x' items test for bar calc.js
6f0a95d

etpinard mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2017
scattergeo does not respect datum position in arrayOk attributes #1529
Closed

etpinard merged commit caade64 into masterMar 30, 2017

etpinard deleted the bar-non-numeric-bug branch March 30, 2017 14:08

etpinard mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2017
Fix hover label positioning for bar trace with set width#1527
Merged
1 task

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

etpinard commented Mar 27, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexcjohnson commented Mar 28, 2017

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

etpinard commented Mar 27, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexcjohnson commented Mar 28, 2017

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

etpinard commented Mar 27, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment