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
Overview of the issues:
pd.options.display.max_rows
When a Series gets truncated, it seems that both parts are formatted separately, with the consequence that eg:
Note that this is not the case with a DataFrame
In [44]: s = pd.Series([1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0.9999,1,1]*10) In [45]: pd.options.display.max_rows = 10 In [46]: s Out[46]: 0 1 1 1 2 1 ... 127 0.9999 128 1.0000 129 1.0000 Length: 130, dtype: float64 In [47]: s.to_frame() Out[47]: 0 0 1.0000 1 1.0000 2 1.0000 3 1.0000 4 1.0000 .. ... 125 1.0000 126 1.0000 127 0.9999 128 1.0000 129 1.0000 [130 rows x 1 columns]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@bjonen if you would be interested
related #7508 about incorrect number of elements in truncated view (which you can also see in the example above)
Sorry, something went wrong.
cc @bjonen can you tackle?
I won't have time for the next two weeks. After that I'm happy to take a look.
@jreback Is this the main priority right now?
@bjonen this would be nice to fix! thanks
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
Overview of the issues:
pd.options.display.max_rows
to larger values has no effect (Incorrect truncating of Series according to max_rows #7508 (comment))When a Series gets truncated, it seems that both parts are formatted separately, with the consequence that eg:
Note that this is not the case with a DataFrame
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: