This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
For example: there are many numbers with the same values and the last number is shifted to the left because of units name position (ms). Values should have appropriate resolution (granularity), it should be clear which value is assigned to which peak on the x axis. Units name can be placed below the values.
Created attachment 30669 [details] screenshot
It seems that these values are so similar that the difference is not important. Yes, we can use labels "1990", "1991", "1992" but I think user impact is minimal, thus lowering priority. The rightmost label is somewhat misplaced. How can we work around it Jirko?
Comment on rightmost label: The chart ensures that rightmost value won't interfere with axis description, but second- etc. rightmost values aren't checked. I would suggest to follow these 2 rules: 1/ last (rightmost) mark should have its value displayed (in general, first and last mark should always have its value displayed in any chart) 2/ use lower number of columns instead of not displaying values of some marks. If there is too much marks that their values doesn't fit, the chart will be most likely not well-readable to the user If the above won't be enough to solve described problem, additional logic can be added to the chart checking interferences between displayed values.
I think it is p3.
Created attachment 30759 [details] screenshot
Another screenshot. I think such view of results is unusable. I can see only '1.0' second but Profiling Points windows shows 999,7 ms average.
Created attachment 31520 [details] screenshot
Doesn't occur after Profiling Points reimplementation - in fact only results listing is currently available, no graphs. Will take into account when designing graphs for new Profiling Points.
verified