Open aphofstede opened 11 years ago
axisystep: 4 doesn't always work either; try setting trendline to [0.83,0.81,0.84,0.84,0.82,0.82,0.83,0.84,0.84,0.8,0.82,0.82]
The problem, i think, lies in snapEnds() I think, around line 760. There:
if (t < to) {
t = round((to + .5) * Math.pow(10, i)) / Math.pow(10, i);
}
This will add 0.5 to the calculated max which is 0.8 there; resulting in a value of 1.3
This seems to fix it,
if (t < to) {
t = round((to + (.5 / Math.pow(10, i))) * Math.pow(10, i)) / Math.pow(10, i);
}
f = round((from - (i > 0 ? 0 : (.5 / Math.pow(10, i)))) * Math.pow(10, i)) / Math.pow(10, i);
but I see more +/-.5 "magic" going on, so perhaps the original coder should have a look.
I actually removed snapEnds because weird behaviors it causes...or because it's magic feature I don't know yet.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Alexander Hofstede <notifications@github.com
wrote:
This seems to fix it,
if (t < to) { t = round((to + (.5 / Math.pow(10, i))) * Math.pow(10, i)) / Math.pow(10, i); }
but I see more +/-.5 "magic" going on, so perhaps the original coder should have a look.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/DmitryBaranovskiy/g.raphael/issues/192#issuecomment-22257737 .
See: http://jsfiddle.net/alexman/vpGyL/844/ If you change the chart height to 99 instead of 100, the y-axis will suddenly show 0-0.8 instead of 0-0.3. This is incorrect. If you stretch the y-axis by increasing the max-value var a bit, it will be ok again. A workaround I found is setting an axisystep of 4, however this is not ideal.