Closed RalfG closed 1 year ago
I added the function for a figure-level mirror spectrum with bubble plot as well. However, I'm not sure what to call the function. Currently, I named it full_mirror
, but I'm open to suggestions for something more descriptive. Both bubble plot and bottom spectrum are optional, and I tried to define some sensible default dimensions for the figure depending on whether there is a bottom spectrum or not.
Merging #46 (3d7a96f) into main (86c623b) will decrease coverage by
4.37%
. The diff coverage is4.49%
.:exclamation: Current head 3d7a96f differs from pull request most recent head f86e36e. Consider uploading reports for the commit f86e36e to get more accurate results
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #46 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 70.58% 66.21% -4.37%
==========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 962 1036 +74
==========================================
+ Hits 679 686 +7
- Misses 283 350 +67
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
spectrum_utils/plot.py | 0.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
spectrum_utils/utils.py | 70.00% <66.66%> (-5.00%) |
:arrow_down: |
This PR adds a function to
spectrum_utils.plot
to plot MS2 mass errors as a bubble plot:Ultimately, my goal was to be able to generate a plot similar to the ones produced by IPSA / USE, which is now possible with some additional wrapper code:
However, since all
spectrum_utils.plot
functions operate at the ax-level (not figure-level), I'm not sure if you would prefer to implement such a function or not.Of note: I also changed the
sup.spectrum
ylim to 1.1 to avoid overflow of the peak annotation labels, which I very often had. This commit can be easily reverted if you do not like it.Let me know what you think!