Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Appearance settings

DOC: missing API docs from #8032 #8285

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.

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 18, 2017
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
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
Next Next commit
DOC: missing API docs from #8032
  • Loading branch information
tacaswell committed Mar 13, 2017
commit b16705d0d12f5ca39dd3d509472e01ef249ceec9
11 changes: 11 additions & 0 deletions 11 doc/api/api_changes/2017-02-06_TAC.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
Do not clip lw when scaling dashes
``````````````````````````````````

Slightly change the algorithm to no longer clip the scaling factor,
thus the patterns will continue to shrink at thin line widths. If the
line width is smaller than the effective pixel size, this may result
in dashed lines turning into solid gray lines. This also required
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why gray?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The line was implicitly black in my head when I wrote this.

slightly tweaking the default patterns for '--', ':', and '.-' so that
with the default line-width the final patterns would not change.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

line-width <- line width? (to be consistent with the other utterances of the expression).

Beside, it is not totally true that the new default patterns are exactly the same as before (e.g. the dotted pattern that is not a 50 %-50 % pattern anymore). Maybe the sentence should just state that the default patterns were tweaked to remain similar with the default lw value as well as to avoid “cluttering” with line widths thiner than the previous clipping boundary.


There is no way to restore the old behavior
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Closing period?

Morty Proxy This is a proxified and sanitized view of the page, visit original site.