👍 from me, though we'll need to fix the test failures. At least some of them appear obviously related to this change.

Don't worry about the white-space changes too much.

On a quick skim 👍 from me.

It probably should have a test as well, a png image test where you draw some lines with varying fill styles would be enough. Something like:

@image_comparison(baseline_images=['rc_markerfill'], extensions=['png'])
def test_markerstyle_rcparams():
    fig, ax = plt.subplots()
    rcParams['markers.fillstyle'] = 'top'
    x = np.range(7)
    ax.plot(x, marker='s')
    rcParams['markers.fillstyle'] = 'bottom'
    ax.plot(x + 1, marker='o')

Also see http://matplotlib.org/devel/testing.html#writing-an-image-comparison-test

Yikes, I should have paid closer attention to the failing tests. I'll look into it, and add an appropriate test case for the feature as suggested.

@nkoep Any progress on looking into the failing tests?

Sorry about disappearing like that. I'll have a look at the problem this weekend.

I just rebased this PR on top of master so that it can be merged without conflicts if there's still interest in the change.

Thank you

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015, 05:44 Niklas Koep [email protected] wrote:

I just rebased this PR on top of master so that it can be merged without
conflicts if there's still interest in the change.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#3602 (comment)
.

@nkoep Sorry for the slow response on our end. Any chance you can add a section to https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/blob/master/doc/users/whats_new/rcparams.rst ?

Will do

I rebased the PR again and added a short note to the rcparams.rst file in d0d9fa3. Hope the explanation is sufficient.

Looks good to me. Merging...