API: Return Index from DatetimeIndex/PeriodIndex.strftime #20240
Conversation
doc/source/whatsnew/v0.23.0.txt
Outdated
| @@ -711,6 +711,7 @@ Other API Changes | |||
| - ``Categorical.fillna`` now validates its ``value`` and ``method`` keyword arguments. It now raises when both or none are specified, matching the behavior of :meth:`Series.fillna` (:issue:`19682`) | |||
| - ``pd.to_datetime('today')`` now returns a datetime, consistent with ``pd.Timestamp('today')``; previously ``pd.to_datetime('today')`` returned a ``.normalized()`` datetime (:issue:`19935`) | |||
| - :func:`Series.str.replace` now takes an optional `regex` keyword which, when set to ``False``, uses literal string replacement rather than regex replacement (:issue:`16808`) | |||
| - ``DatetimeIndex.strftime`` and ``PeriodIndex.strftime`` now return an ``Index`` instead of a numpy array to be consistent with similar accessors (:issue:`20127`) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you add the :func: ref here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in theory you should have to change some tests on Series.dt.strftime, if you don't that means we are not fully testing this, can you check.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But how would the output of Series.dt.strftime change when DatetimeIndex.strftime returns an Index instead of an array? It doesn't seem to ultimately affect anything in Series.dt.strftime from what I can tell.
jreback
added
Datetime
|
@reidy-p merged the pre-cursor, can you rebase |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #20240 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 91.77% 91.76% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 152 150 -2
Lines 49196 49151 -45
==========================================
- Hits 45151 45102 -49
- Misses 4045 4049 +4
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
thanks @reidy-p keep em coming! |
git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diffI will update the docstring after #20103 is merged.