src/util/types.ts (1)

747-759: Update AxisInterval docs to describe equidistantPreserveEnd semantics

You’ve extended AxisInterval with 'equidistantPreserveEnd', but the preceding comment only documents the equidistantPreserveStart variant. It would be good to explicitly describe how equidistantPreserveEnd behaves (e.g., “selects an N and pattern so that ticks are equidistant and the end tick is preserved”), to keep the type docs self‑contained and discoverable.

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

test/cartesian/getEquidistantTicks.spec.ts (1)

36-75: Good test coverage for the new function.

The test suite covers the empty array case and multiple end-anchored scenarios. The parameterized tests clearly demonstrate the end-preservation behavior.

Consider adding test cases for:

• Mixed scenarios where early ticks collide but later ones don't
• Boundary conditions where minTickGap is non-zero
• Negative sign parameter to verify reversed direction handling
• Single tick in array (edge case)

These would further strengthen confidence in the implementation, though current coverage validates core functionality.

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

test/cartesian/getEquidistantTicks.spec.ts (2)

36-74: Test suite properly validates the new function and addresses past review concerns.

The test at lines 46-73 correctly validates that the function skips ticks to satisfy minTickGap while preserving the end tick. Tracing through the logic confirms that with the given parameters (10px coordinates apart, 10px tick size, 8px minTickGap), stepsize=1 would cause collisions while stepsize=2 succeeds, returning indices 0, 2, 4 as expected. This would NOT pass with an identity function, which addresses the previous reviewer's concern.

Consider adding test cases for better coverage:

• All ticks fit: When minTickGap allows all ticks to be shown, verify all are returned.
• Only last tick fits: When minTickGap is very large, verify only the last tick is returned.
• Sign = -1: Validate the function works correctly with negative sign (reverse direction).
• Edge cases: Single tick, two ticks, etc.

Example test case for "all ticks fit":

it('should return all ticks when they all fit within minTickGap constraints', () => {
  const ticks = [
    { value: 'A', coordinate: 0, index: 0 },
    { value: 'B', coordinate: 50, index: 1 },
    { value: 'C', coordinate: 100, index: 2 },
  ];
  const getTickSizeStatic = () => 10;
  
  const result = getEquidistantPreserveEndTicks(
    1,
    { start: 0, end: 150 },
    getTickSizeStatic,
    ticks,
    5, // minTickGap - ticks are far enough apart
  );
  
  expect(result.map(t => t.value)).toEqual(['A', 'B', 'C']);
});

---

59-61: Clarify comment for better readability.

The comment could be more precise:

• Line 59: "The ticks are 10px apart" is slightly ambiguous. Consider: "The tick coordinates are 10px apart."
• Lines 60-61: "we expect indices 4, 2, 0" suggests reverse order, but the result is in forward order [0, 2, 4]. Consider: "Since we anchor at the end (Index 4) with stepsize 2 and offset 0, the sequence includes indices 0, 2, 4."

Apply this diff for clarity:

-    // The ticks are 10px apart. We set minTickGap to 8px.
+    // The tick coordinates are 10px apart. We set minTickGap to 8px.
     // This forces the algorithm to skip every other tick (Step Size 2) to avoid overlap.
-    // Since we anchor at the end (Index 4), we expect indices 4, 2, 0.
+    // Since we anchor at the end (Index 4) with stepsize 2, the sequence includes indices 0, 2, 4.

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro