Skip to content

Remove weird comment in parse_dates.py #22418

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 19, 2018

Conversation

gfyoung
Copy link
Member

@gfyoung gfyoung commented Aug 19, 2018

Was added back in #12915...not sure why I did that. 😕

@gfyoung gfyoung added the Clean label Aug 19, 2018
@gfyoung gfyoung added this to the 0.24.0 milestone Aug 19, 2018
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 19, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #22418 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #22418   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.05%   92.05%           
=======================================
  Files         169      169           
  Lines       50713    50713           
=======================================
  Hits        46683    46683           
  Misses       4030     4030
Flag Coverage Δ
#multiple 90.46% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
#single 42.25% <ø> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8bb2cc1...2c8e6e8. Read the comment docs.

@gfyoung gfyoung merged commit 140c7bb into pandas-dev:master Aug 19, 2018
@gfyoung gfyoung deleted the parse-dates-weird-comment branch August 19, 2018 10:49
@@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ def test_parse_tz_aware(self):
assert stamp.minute == 39
try:
assert result.index.tz is pytz.utc
except AssertionError: # hello Yaroslav
except AssertionError:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

actually why do we have an assertion error check here at all?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure...that code is at least 2 years old.

I imagine that pytz compatibility has improved since then...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can u try to remove this and see

gfyoung added a commit to forking-repos/pandas that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2018
Sup3rGeo pushed a commit to Sup3rGeo/pandas that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants