Contour restyle zmin zmax #1653
Conversation
- note the different behavior between heatmap-like and contour-like traces.
src/plot_api/plot_api.js
Outdated
| @@ -1624,6 +1624,11 @@ function _restyle(gd, aobj, _traces) { | |||
| flags.docalc = true; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // some attributes declare a 'recalc' flag | |||
| if(valObject.recalc) { | |||
| flags.docalc = true; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
... slowly migrating to something better than those ugly recalcAttrs lists in restyle and relayout.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Down the line, this is going to require valObject.dostyle, .doplot, .doCamera etc etc... would we be better off with something like valObject.editType = 'docalc' etc? Which presumably we could use like a flaglist (and validate as such in plotschema_test)?
💯 🍻 for getting this effort going!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
valObject.editType = 'docalc'
Right. I guess that scales better. Thanks 👍
| // some attributes declare an 'editType' flaglist | ||
| if(valObject.editType === 'docalc') { | ||
| flags.docalc = true; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍
I guess later this can change to something like
if(valObject.editType) {
valObject.editType.split('+').forEach(function(flag) {
flags[flag] = true;
});
}But don't need to do that now - lets wait until we have validation of editType, perhaps in plotschema_test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But don't need to do that now - lets wait until we have validation of editType, perhaps in plotschema_test?
Yep, that's what I was thinking. Referencing #648
|
Looks good! 💃 |
fixes #1649
So, turns out that restyling
zminandzmaxfor contour traces has been broken sincev1.0.0and nobody noticed 😑This PR fixes this by making
zminandzmaxredo calcdata as the contour calc does use it. Note that this isn't the case forheatmaptraces wherezminandzmaxare only used in the plot step.cc @alexcjohnson