checkpoint markers #2095
Merged
checkpoint markers #2095
Conversation
This file contains 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
Fil
reviewed
Jun 18, 2024
mbostock
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 28, 2024
* for lines with variable aesthetics we want to maintain the higher-level semantics of markers: - markerStart matches the start of the line - markerMid matches the points which are not at the start or the end - markerEnd matches the end of the line Since these lines are implemented as multiple paths, we have change the low-level implementation of markers: - markerStart only applies to the first segment of a line - markerMid applies to all the segments, complemented by the start of all but the first segments - markerEnd only applies to the last segment of a line closes #2093 * better marker strategy (#2095) --------- Co-authored-by: Mike Bostock <[email protected]>
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Not quite working, but trying to illustrate what I mean in #2094 (review). Could probably still be improved…