TST: implement tm.to_array, box_with_timedelta, box4

[jbrockmendel]

Test helpers and fixtures broken off of #23734 and #23642 since these are blockers for boxing and (thankfully, finally) simplification in these files

[pep8speaks]

Hello @jbrockmendel! Thanks for submitting the PR.

• There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/tests/arithmetic/conftest.py !

• There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/util/testing.py !

[jorisvandenbossche]

@jbrockmendel Why not merging those two PRs you mention? We have already reviewed those, and I think they are more or less ready to be merged?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #23748 into master will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 22.22%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #23748      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.25%   92.23%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         161      161              
  Lines       51390    51408      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits        47411    47415       +4     
- Misses       3979     3993      +14

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	90.62% <22.22%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
#single	42.3% <11.11%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/util/testing.py	85% <22.22%> (-1.08%)	⬇️

---

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 db2066b...b440900. Read the comment docs.

[jbrockmendel]

Why not merging those two PRs you mention? We have already reviewed those, and I think they are more or less ready to be merged?

If those are ready then that'd be great. But my understanding is that there are not-easily-resolved questions, particularly the combinatorial explosion.

[jreback]

first has not been reviewed

[jorisvandenbossche]

first has not been reviewed

Then let's review that? (I have already reviewed it)

If those are ready then that'd be great. But my understanding is that there are not-easily-resolved questions, particularly the combinatorial explosion

As I mentioned on the PRs, they are ready for me. For the combinatorial issue, as long as the fixture is not used that much, we can deal with it later I think (as you mentioned there, you were not actually changing the number of options for the fixtures, just reorganizing them a bit)

[jorisvandenbossche]

first has not been reviewed

Then let's review that? (I have already reviewed it)

Now, for me it doesn't matter much, it's just two other PRs that @jbrockmendel needs to rebase/merge conflicts, and we that have to look again at the new diff. But if this is a more logical chunk of changes, that's fine.

[jreback]

thanks @jbrockmendel