We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
For get_indexer we do type inference on object dtype, but we dont do this for get_indexer_non_unique. Is this intentional?
dti = pd.date_range("2016-01-01", periods=3) target = dti.astype(object) >>> dti.get_indexer_non_unique(target) (array([-1, -1, -1]), array([-1, -1, -1])) >>> dti.get_indexer(target) array([0, 1, 2])
We could also conceivably fall back to object-vs-object instead of returning no-matches.
There's also Cateegorical with matching categories dtype:
ci = pd.CategoricalIndex(dti) >>> dti.get_indexer_non_unique(ci) (array([-1, -1, -1]), array([-1, -1, -1])) >>> dti.get_indexer(ci) array([0, 1, 2])
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@jreback can you weigh in on the desired behavior or (and possibly who else to ping)?
Sorry, something went wrong.
Fixed in or near #38105
No branches or pull requests
For get_indexer we do type inference on object dtype, but we dont do this for get_indexer_non_unique. Is this intentional?
We could also conceivably fall back to object-vs-object instead of returning no-matches.
There's also Cateegorical with matching categories dtype:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: