-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 76
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Reverse gist_rainbow colors to match order of manual presets #2731
Conversation
Co-authored-by: P. L. Lim <2090236+pllim@users.noreply.github.com>
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Yup, just caught that and fixed it. |
Whew, Github picked up the commits after that push. |
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.
The diff LGTM but I don't grok the test. I'll defer approval to the devs who worked on the original RGB stuff. Thanks!
It's testing the same thing as before I just reorganized it slightly to not have to think about skipping an index in reverse order. |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2731 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.07% 88.66% +0.59%
==========================================
Files 108 108
Lines 15883 15886 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 13989 14086 +97
+ Misses 1894 1800 -94 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
Makes sense to me - thanks!
Just wanted to link to #2568 in case we need a paper trail - it was that change that necessitated the flip here.
… order of manual presets
…1-on-v3.8.x Backport PR #2731 on branch v3.8.x (Reverse gist_rainbow colors to match order of manual presets)
@camipacifici noticed that the RGB colors at n>5 were reversed compared to at n<=5. This fixes the problem.
Before:
After: