-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
BUG: Use correct ExtensionArray reductions in DataFrame reductions #35254
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 all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9b84158
BUG: df.sum with Int64 dtype
jbrockmendel 15ab7d7
Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas into bu…
jbrockmendel c89da43
whatnsew
jbrockmendel 261fa32
add test case for GH34520, copied from GH35112
jorisvandenbossche 9ee9669
add test to ensure EA op is used for integer array
jorisvandenbossche 390b9bb
add test for GH32651, copied from GH34210
jorisvandenbossche 312cb9c
remove now duplicated test
jorisvandenbossche 0f33353
add self._mgr.any_extension_types check
jorisvandenbossche babedb9
add issue number to whatsnew
jorisvandenbossche 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
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.
can we not use the same exact path for non extension arrays
these if/then for extension arrays are terrible
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.
we'd have to put the analogous check in each of the
nanops.nanfoo
functions, which I know @jorisvandenbossche wouldn't like.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.
is
func
now effectively the same asblk_func
on L8575?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.
Indeed, doing it here is IMO much cleaner than in each nanops function.
Not exactly, the axis handling is different (also
blk_func
knows it gets an array, so the extract_array stuff is not needed).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 guess this is ok as a short term check, but seeing these constant if is_extension_array do one thing, else do something else basically means the api is missing lots of things. I would much rather fix it than keep doing this kind of thing. This makes code extremly hard to read and understand.
I remember being very excited when we removed the is_ndarray check here and this because much simpler, now we are going backwards.