Better error message for DataFrame.hist() without numerical columns (…

[matsmaiwald]

Closes #10444

Added simple check for non-zero number of numeric columns plus suggested error message in case the check fails.

Happy to make any adjustments this if desired.

[simonjayhawkins]

Suggested change

	if naxes == 0:
	if not naxes:

[gfyoung]

I prefer how it is. This is more explicit.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #26483 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #26483      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.75%   91.74%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         174      174              
  Lines       50756    50758       +2     
==========================================
- Hits        46572    46568       -4     
- Misses       4184     4190       +6

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	90.25% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#single	41.69% <0%> (-0.09%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/plotting/_core.py	83.77% <0%> (-0.13%)	⬇️
pandas/io/gbq.py	78.94% <0%> (-10.53%)	⬇️
pandas/core/frame.py	97.02% <0%> (-0.12%)	⬇️

---

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 d3a1912...576f0a8. Read the comment docs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #26483 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #26483      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.75%   91.74%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         174      174              
  Lines       50756    50763       +7     
==========================================
- Hits        46572    46570       -2     
- Misses       4184     4193       +9

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	90.25% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#single	41.69% <0%> (-0.09%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/plotting/_core.py	83.77% <0%> (-0.13%)	⬇️
pandas/io/gbq.py	78.94% <0%> (-10.53%)	⬇️
pandas/core/dtypes/common.py	95.85% <0%> (-1.6%)	⬇️
pandas/core/indexes/timedeltas.py	90.96% <0%> (-0.63%)	⬇️
pandas/core/indexes/datetimes.py	96.36% <0%> (-0.5%)	⬇️
pandas/core/frame.py	97.02% <0%> (-0.12%)	⬇️
pandas/core/indexes/range.py	97.97% <0%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
pandas/core/indexes/base.py	96.73% <0%> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/numeric.py	97.34% <0%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/period.py	92.58% <0%> (+0.47%)	⬆️
... and 1 more

---

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 d3a1912...91ab6d8. Read the comment docs.

[simonjayhawkins]

@matsmaiwald

thanks for the PR.

the CI failure looks unrelated to your change.

can you add a test, perhaps using the code sample in the issue as the test case?

[matsmaiwald]

Thanks for the code review @simonjayhawkins.

I just added a test in the way you suggested.

[simonjayhawkins]

lgtm @datapythonista @TomAugspurger

[datapythonista]

lgtm, not sure about marking the test as slow, is it really slow?

Also, if this can wait until #26414 that would make my life a bit easier (will be much easier to resolve the conflict here than there).

[simonjayhawkins]

lgtm, not sure about marking the test as slow, is it really slow?

that had crossed my mind, but all the tests in this module are marked as slow, so was thinking that it would be better to mark as slow at the module level as a follow-up at some point.

[jreback]

thanks @matsmaiwald