issue_comments: 195499002
This data as json
html_url | issue_url | id | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/788#issuecomment-195499002 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/788 | 195499002 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDE5NTQ5OTAwMg== | 22805 | 2016-03-11T19:00:27Z | 2016-03-11T19:00:27Z | NONE | I think the axes on the pdf are wrong as I used integers in the coordinate definition and Python 2 to generate the example. Redefining time as [1.0, 2,0, 3.0] gives a better plot. I should have done this in my example, sorry about that. I can do this in matplotlib and will do so, I guess I was little surprised that (a) it worked at all, and (b) it only worked in one orientation. I would expect the plots to look exactly like time vs. x, except the time axis is normalised by 'r'. My hope was that this would work, so I could do something like: temp.plot(x='rtime', y='x', col='r') and get an array of plots, each with their own timescales along the x-axis. For my analysis, time is seconds is not really that interesting, it's how it maps to the rotation timescale that matters. I realise this is probably not a normal use case, so thanks to both of you for taking the time to reply to my question!
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
139863868 |