TYP: some type annotations for interpolate #34631
Merged
Conversation
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
WillAyd
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2020
pandas/core/missing.py
Outdated
| @@ -92,8 +94,7 @@ def clean_fill_method(method, allow_nearest=False): | |||
| return method | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def clean_interp_method(method, **kwargs): | |||
| order = kwargs.get("order") | |||
| def clean_interp_method(method: str, order: Optional[int] = None, **kwargs) -> str: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are kwargs even required here any more?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would imagine so, split out order so that can add type annotation for internal checks. will double check though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it doesn't appear that we pass the kwargs through to np.interp (left, right and period) but do for scipy.interpolate.UnivariateSpline
did you mean kwargs not used in this function? That's true, but would need to do order = kwargs.get("order") in the calling functions if I remove kwargs here. I don't see that as an improvement.
should I revert this change?
|
Yea I don’t think its that important so if a lot of effort just revert
… On Jun 7, 2020, at 10:35 AM, Simon Hawkins ***@***.***> wrote:
@simonjayhawkins commented on this pull request.
In pandas/core/missing.py <#34631 (comment)>:
> @@ -92,8 +94,7 @@ def clean_fill_method(method, allow_nearest=False):
return method
-def clean_interp_method(method, **kwargs):
- order = kwargs.get("order")
+def clean_interp_method(method: str, order: Optional[int] = None, **kwargs) -> str:
it doesn't appear that we pass the kwargs through to np.interp (left, right and period) but do for scipy.interpolate.interp1d
did you mean kwargs not used in this function? That's true, but would need to do order = kwargs.get("order") in the calling functions if I remove kwargs here. I don't see that as an improvement.
should I revert this change?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#34631 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEU4UIZQS5KLL7E7JDLFELRVPFULANCNFSM4NXKKNVA>.
|
|
Thanks @simonjayhawkins |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
pre-cursor to #34628