issue_comments

Table actions

5 rows where issue = 112928260 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 4

author_association 2

issue 1

  • size and aspect arguments for plotting methods even without faceting · 5 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
268204399 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/637#issuecomment-268204399 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/637 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDI2ODIwNDM5OQ== fmaussion 10050469 2016-12-20T10:08:35Z 2016-12-20T10:08:35Z MEMBER 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   size and aspect arguments for plotting methods even without faceting 112928260
233201657 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/637#issuecomment-233201657 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/637 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzMzIwMTY1Nw== shoyer 1217238 2016-07-17T20:17:49Z 2016-07-17T20:17:49Z MEMBER

@robintw The challenge is that we want to handle aspect consistently even if we're doing a multi-faceted plot. Right now, we use the opposite convention (to matplotlib) for multi-faceted plots. So either: 1. We change the existing behavior for muilt-panel plots (and become inconsistent with Seaborn). 2. We change the existing behavior of aspect for single panel plots (and become inconsistent with matplotlib).

I would lean toward (2), currently implemented in this PR given that I think aspect is used more often for muilt-panel plots, but I'm OK with either option. If we pick (1), then we'll need to adjust both this PR and the existing behavior for multi-panel plots.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   size and aspect arguments for plotting methods even without faceting 112928260
232153175 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/637#issuecomment-232153175 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/637 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzMjE1MzE3NQ== robintw 296686 2016-07-12T19:28:10Z 2016-07-12T19:28:10Z CONTRIBUTOR

Coming here from #897, it seems that we just need to decide to go with matplotlib's version, and therefore switch round the tuple given as figsize at https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/637/commits/400b1ef1d142c3c0dec1ff3c9f3cdfffa2229c10#diff-4ee153eb90c5207a5ed2e2b997bf6ce9R212, and then update the docs to go with it.

Does that make sense?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   size and aspect arguments for plotting methods even without faceting 112928260
152744407 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/637#issuecomment-152744407 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/637 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDE1Mjc0NDQwNw== jhamman 2443309 2015-10-31T15:43:07Z 2015-10-31T15:43:07Z MEMBER

Bummer. I'll just say I think we need to stay with the matplotlib convention. We require matplotlib as a dependency for plotting, not seaborn. We are also passing the aspect argument to a matplotlib function/class. I don't think it makes sense to say the aspect argument is passed to the matplotlib figure creator... after we revere itss order. 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   size and aspect arguments for plotting methods even without faceting 112928260
152676248 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/637#issuecomment-152676248 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/637 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDE1MjY3NjI0OA== shoyer 1217238 2015-10-31T00:00:21Z 2015-10-31T00:00:35Z MEMBER

Ugh -- the aspect argument in matplotlib (e.g., on imshow) uses the opposite convention from Seaborn (https://github.com/mwaskom/seaborn/issues/746). So we'll have to break with at least one of those libraries to make this consistent.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   size and aspect arguments for plotting methods even without faceting 112928260

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] (
   [html_url] TEXT,
   [issue_url] TEXT,
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [reactions] TEXT,
   [performed_via_github_app] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
    ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
    ON [issue_comments] ([user]);