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

Fixes issue #688 with slightly inadequate geological map as a result of plot_2d() #689

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 29, 2022

Conversation

mkondratyev85
Copy link
Contributor

@mkondratyev85 mkondratyev85 commented Apr 6, 2022

Description

Please include a summary of the changes.

Relates to issue #688

Checklist

  • My code follows the PEP 8 style guidelines.
  • My code uses type hinting for function and method arguments and return values.
  • My code contains descriptive and helpful docstrings
    which are formatted per the Google Python Style Guidelines.
  • I have created tests which entirely cover my code.
  • The test code either 1. demonstrates at least one valuable use case (e.g. integration tests)
    or 2. verifies that outputs are as expected for given inputs (e.g. unit tests).
  • New and existing tests pass locally with my changes.

@mkondratyev85
Copy link
Contributor Author

Figure_1

After fixing this issue you can see that the resulting geological map corresponds to what we actually see on cross sections (as compared to what we have seen in #688 )

Copy link
Collaborator

@Japhiolite Japhiolite left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

could've also done with order='F' in reshape, but transposing is fine too

@Japhiolite Japhiolite merged commit b8f14b4 into gempy-project:master Apr 29, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants