Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Potential vcs test script #126

Open
jypeter opened this issue Feb 9, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

Potential vcs test script #126

jypeter opened this issue Feb 9, 2017 · 4 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@jypeter
Copy link
Member

jypeter commented Feb 9, 2017

Following @durack1 request in #23 , I have tried to write a self-contained script that produces that produces the figure at the top of CDAT/cdat#1080

The script needs the gsw package to run (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/gsw/). I have just done the following in my old versions of CDAT (don't know what people should do for that in conda)

pip install gsw

The script, png and pdf outputs are available there: https://files.lsce.ipsl.fr/public.php?service=files&t=81f4d60326e1f3804b93efc05702b480

You'll find below what I get when I run the same script with different versions of CDAT (I do have some quite old versions)

UVCDAT-1.1.0
deep_ocean_test_uvcdat-1 1 0

UVCDAT-1.5.1
deep_ocean_test_uvcdat-1 5 1

UVCDAT-2.1.0
deep_ocean_test_uvcdat-2 1 0

VCDAT-2.8.0
deep_ocean_test_vcdat-2 8 0

Of course, the output I like best is the one I get from CDAT 1.1.1 ... Ideally, I would like to have the very same plot with any recent (vtk-based) version of CDAT

I guess I have a black png output for 2.1.0 because I'm running vcdat in a virtual machine and vtk/gl based stuff does weird things sometimes (pdf output is OK, but not quite right). I don't have 2.8.0 installed, so a colleague ran it on his Mac

Some thoughts about the 1.1.0 vs 2.8.0

  • pdf output file of 2.8.0 is ... 87 times bigger than 1.1.0 . It seems that using x.pdf(out_name) instead of x.pdf(out_name, width=311, height=38) does not make it smaller
  • the relative positioning of objects is good, even if I have a font size problem, so that's pretty good news
  • A part of the legend text is greenish instead of black. But maybe I did something too non-standard
  • I have the isoline values in the png, but not on the pdf
  • The marker sizes are not good, but this probably requires some adjustment, like the font size
  • probably other differences, but I have to run to catch my bus
@sankhesh
Copy link
Contributor

sankhesh commented Feb 9, 2017

Thanks for posting the test script @jypeter

@durack1, I don't think this issue is related to the patterns code. We can look at how markers are handled next.

@durack1
Copy link
Member

durack1 commented Feb 9, 2017

@jypeter thanks for this! @sankhesh completely agree this is a separate issue, however @jypeter has created some fairly specialised plots in various versions of UV-CDAT and these are perfect "real world" candidates for the test suite. The behavior changes through each version of UV-CDAT is also something useful to be aware of

@sankhesh to make things easier, here's the script
deep_ocean_plot_standalone_v2.py.txt

@doutriaux1 doutriaux1 modified the milestone: 3.0 May 5, 2017
@doutriaux1 doutriaux1 modified the milestones: 3.0, post 3.0 Mar 29, 2018
@doutriaux1 doutriaux1 modified the milestones: 8.1, 8.2 Mar 27, 2019
@doutriaux1
Copy link
Contributor

@scottwittenburg please add this as test in your marker PR.
deep_ocean_plot_standalone_v2.py.txt

@doutriaux1
Copy link
Contributor

goes with #82

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants