-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 76
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
Re-enable exporting cubeviz spectrum viewer #2825
Merged
kecnry
merged 3 commits into
spacetelescope:main
from
kecnry:export-cubeviz-spectrum-viewer
Apr 24, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ Bug Fixes | |
Cubeviz | ||
^^^^^^^ | ||
|
||
- Re-enable support for exporting spectrum-viewer. [#2825] | ||
|
||
Imviz | ||
^^^^^ | ||
|
||
|
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we also have
restore_marks
and only populate the two lists ifrestore
isn't empty, to avoid looping over things we don't need to update in thezip
later?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure I follow - do you mean store a copy of the original mark? I'm trying to store/restore as little as possible to minimize memory impacts. I tried to avoid the append, but there can be some copying-referencing issues if we're not careful then.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would
restore_mark
have a copy of the object or a reference to the original in this case? I can never keep track of when python does which, but this would avoid looping over things that don't need to be restored. If memory is an issues it can stay as-is, I honestly don't think this is going to be impactful either way here.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suspect this would be more expensive than looping over the empty dictionary, but I'm not sure. We could also track indices, but I'm not sure its worth it either 🤷♂️
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As I said, I don't feel strongly about it, I'll just approve.