include scale name in error #1298
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mbostock
force-pushed
the
mbostock/better-error
branch
from
0d2ba4c to
850a3fa
Compare
tophtucker
approved these changes
Feb 28, 2023
Contributor
tophtucker
left a comment
tophtucker
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Nice! Better!
(isMonotonic in auto.js could probably be rewritten as isOrdered(domain, orderof(domain)) if we want one fewer helper?)
Member
Author
I thought about that, and no, the behavior is actually slightly different. The one for the threshold scale is more strict because it doesn’t allow non-comparable values either. At any rate I don’t think it’s worth the effort to DRY yet. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Includes the scale name in errors for easier debugging.
I also rewrote the
isOrderedhelper to iterate directly, instead of materializing all the pairs using d3.pairs and then testing with array.every. I think it’s cleaner this way, and slightly faster, not that it matters.