Emit xlim_changed / ylim_changed when limits expand via set_xticks / set_yticks#31251
Emit xlim_changed / ylim_changed when limits expand via set_xticks / set_yticks#31251timhoffm merged 25 commits intomatplotlib:mainfrom
Conversation
|
Hi @Chirag3841, I'm very sorry but I misunderstood the original issue as not setting the limits correctly, rather than the limits being set but doing so silently without a callback. I believe your original implementation was close to correct, rather than the feedback I gave you here. I believe a test like this should verify the fix: def test_set_ticks_emits_lim_changed():
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.set_xlim(0.5, 1)
called = []
ax.callbacks.connect('xlim_changed', called.append)
ax.set_xticks([0, 100])
assert called |
@scottshambaugh Thanks for the clarification I pushed that commit again and changed the test file according to your requirement too . Suggest me the changes if required as it is causing one test failure colorbar test one which I don't think is related to this . |
Thanks for the review and suggestion. |
|
Any update on this PR ? |
| ticks = self.convert_units(ticks) | ||
| locator = mticker.FixedLocator(ticks) # validate ticks early. | ||
| if len(ticks): | ||
| old_vmin, old_vmax = self.get_view_interval() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can keep this as a tuple
| old_vmin, old_vmax = self.get_view_interval() | |
| old_view_interval = self.get_view_interval() |
And also do the != comparison on the tuple below. This keeps the logic on a slightly higher level.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@timhoffm I tried using tuple comparison as suggested, but it led to multiple failures due to array comparison ambiguity. So, I revert back to initial one .
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, right it's an array on Axis. Sorry for the noise.
| axis.set_view_interval(min(ticks), max(ticks)) | ||
| new_vmin, new_vmax = self.get_view_interval() | ||
| if old_vmin != new_vmin or old_vmax != new_vmax: | ||
| self.axes.callbacks.process( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just to be sure: Have you checked that this is the right place to call the callbacks? Could it be on a broader (caller of _set_tick_locations) or narrower (set_view_interval) scope?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I kept the callback in _set_tick_locations since this is where limits are updated due to tick changes.
Moving it to set_view_interval would trigger the callback for all view limit updates, which seems broader than intended here.
|
@timhoffm Thanks for reviewing and giving me valuable suggestions in this PR . |
|
Thanks @Chirag3841 |
PR summary
AI Disclosure
PR checklist
Description
Fixes an issue where axis limit change callbacks were not emitted when the limits changed as a consequence of calling set_xticks or set_yticks.
Currently, when ticks extend beyond the existing axis limits, the limits are expanded internally via set_view_interval, but the corresponding "xlim_changed" / "ylim_changed" callbacks are not emitted. This leads to inconsistent behavior compared to explicitly calling set_xlim / set_ylim.