-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
New Excel functionality #2478
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
Comments
sure I will look into it. The ExcelReader will need to be decoupled from the TextReader.... If we agree that all what get's dumped should be read in the same fashion in a routrip we are good to go. for example dumping a Df with a Mutiindex Column will result in merged cells probably in multiple levels. These merged cells musst be present to be read the df back |
@locojay, agreed that as much as possible should be recreated on read: names, labels, index structure. Rather then relying on style information, I suggest using the following convention, which should
If this works, you (the parser) should be able to figure out the right thing to do in all cases, can you? This is pretty close to what you've already done, and also uses @changhiskhan 's idea of once the parse can handle all parts being present/missing, it's fine to add Should integer ("default") indexes be dumped to the file? no? optional? I would like merged cells to be optional (default on is fine by me), in case There's a lot of work in making this work consistently.... diminishing returns? |
related #2088 |
@locojay , are you claiming this or shall I slog through this? |
@y-p: I am not claiming it. If you have time to slog through it that would be great as i am busy at the moment and do not use the excel reading at all ... |
@jtratner this can be closed? by various issues |
this isn't completely closed at this point, we don't have a way to put multiple dataframes in the same sheet. We have covered most of the MI round-tripping I believe. |
I'm comfortable closing this. The mi header expansion stuff has been added since as @jtratner Closing, since it's stale. If a specific feature request is in order, open a fresh one. |
Initial implementation was #2370 by @locojay, which was very nice but suffered from
several corner-cases and ambiguity when the files were read back in.
f0aa065 was a stopgap measure to roll back the functionality so 0.10 was not delayed.
The enhancements should be brought back in 0.11, enahnced with parsing of
multiindex on both axes, support for index names everywhere, decisions on best
defaults, arguments and so on.
@locojay, are you still interested in completing this after a bit more discussion?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: