Update animations.md #2409
Merged
Update animations.md #2409
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
In the 'gapminder' example, the current code snippets appear to assign a list to `fig_dict["layout"]["sliders"]` twice. Once when the figure layout is initially created, and then again when more information is added to `sliders_dict`. This dictionary entry is overwritten before the figure is constructed. My proposed change just removes the initial assignment which seems to be of no consequence. Striving for clarity!
|
Thanks very much for catching this! :) |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In the 'gapminder' example, the current code snippets appear to assign a list to
fig_dict["layout"]["sliders"]twice. Once when the figure layout is initially created, and then again when more information is added tosliders_dict. This dictionary entry is overwritten before the figure is constructed. My proposed change just removes the initial assignment which seems to be of no consequence. Striving for clarity!