Success! Looks like we've fixed this one. According to our records the fix was applied for EXTGWT-2560 in a recent build.
  1. #1
    Ext GWT Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    132
    Vote Rating
    1
    arkadye is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default In GXT 3.0.2b, NumericAxis.setMinimum() doesn't work - minimum is always 0.

    In GXT 3.0.2b, NumericAxis.setMinimum() doesn't work - minimum is always 0.


    Hi,

    In GXT 3.0.2b, I have a bar (column) chart. I am setting the minimum of the numeric y-axis to 1, but still getting it started from 0. My y-values are in the range 0 - 63. So I need to see in the chart only bars for values greater than 1. Instead I see bars for all values.

    It looks like the implementation of the method snapEnds() resets minimum (this.from) to 0 in line 364.

    Best regards,

    Arkady.

  2. #2
    Sencha User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    13,971
    Vote Rating
    132
    sven is a glorious beacon of light sven is a glorious beacon of light sven is a glorious beacon of light sven is a glorious beacon of light sven is a glorious beacon of light sven is a glorious beacon of light

      0  

    Default


    Thanks for the report. I will move this thread to the busg forum and push it to our issue tracker.

  3. #3
    Ext GWT Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    132
    Vote Rating
    1
    arkadye is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Thanks Sven.

    Would you also please make sure that setMaximum() works correctly. Currently, when I set maximum to 1 and then add value 10, the axis stops at 1 as expected but the bar doesn't stop at 1 - it goes all the way till the end of the chart area.

    Thanks.

    Bets regards,

    Arkady.

  4. #4
    Sencha Premium Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18
    Vote Rating
    1
    mpickell is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default update?

    update?


    Any update on this? I seem to be having issues with the snapEnds method as well.

    when i set the min and max to (-2) and (102), the "from" value seems to be calculating to -100. I'm using version 3.0.1 but it doesn't look like anything changed up to v3.0.3 either.

  5. #5
    Sencha Premium Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18
    Vote Rating
    1
    mpickell is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default workaround

    workaround


    Here is a quick and dirty workaround that is just overriding the whole class to replace the snapEnds method for now:

    http://www.sencha.com/forum/showthre...l=1#post933327

  6. #6
    Sencha - GXT Dev Team
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,734
    Vote Rating
    90
    Colin Alworth is a glorious beacon of light Colin Alworth is a glorious beacon of light Colin Alworth is a glorious beacon of light Colin Alworth is a glorious beacon of light Colin Alworth is a glorious beacon of light

      0  

    Default


    We've made a comprehensive set of changes, modifying the behavior of setMaximum/setMinimum, setSteps, and setInterval to try to make them more predictable and reliable. These changes are in SVN and the latest nightly build, and will be available in the next release.

    The first change was to stop any 'pretty number' code when a maximum or a minimum is set on the NumericAxis. This enables developers to tie down one or both ends of the axis by specifying a specific starting or ending point - if a value is not specified (or is restored to the default NaN), the axis will use the data to find an appropriate value.

    Once in this state, the number of steps (i.e. setSteps(int), defaults to -1) or the size of each step (i.e. setInterval(double), defaults to -1) may be specified to be followed. If the number of steps are given, the axis will use that to compute a interval size, based on the range (distance from min to max, described above), if not, it will use the given interval to compute the number of steps.

    If no maximum or minimum are set, the step count or interval will be treated as a suggestion, not a requirement - without specified bounds, 'pretty numbers' will need to be generated, but we don't presently use a method that lets the step count/size override the bounds to generate good values. If both step count and interval are specified, step count will take precedence - it is contradictory to specify both when you can set the max and min and either step or interval instead. If neither step or interval is set but a max or min is specified, the axis will use place 10 steps between the maximum and minimum value as a default.