-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
ENH: Add prod to masked_reductions #33442
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
Changes from 11 commits
Commits
Show all changes
16 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3e1f06c
REF: Add prod to masked_reductions
dsaxton a7eb301
Update
dsaxton 48c1432
Change test
dsaxton c73d7b9
Keep
dsaxton a429ced
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into masked-prod
dsaxton b0c95fc
Update
dsaxton c3e1763
Move functions
dsaxton 6b66756
Lint
dsaxton 58f7bd0
maybe_cast_result_dtype
dsaxton a2574df
Lint
dsaxton 474506b
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into masked-prod
dsaxton 57551b8
Revert and change test
dsaxton 1d25569
Lint
dsaxton de5954a
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into masked-prod
dsaxton 2701fff
Remove
dsaxton 8321945
Lint
dsaxton File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am still not sure we actually need to do this. We could also choose to follow numpy's behaviour to return platform int (any idea what we do for "bool" dtype?)
BTW, this should also change the result for
sum
, so this was not tested?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jorisvandenbossche I think you're right and it was actually the test that needed to change here (np.int64 -> np.int_)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, in any case that's what I did for sum, I see now (so if we decide on following numpy vs always returning int64, we should do it for both sum and prod)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(but I am fine with following numpy)