-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
BUG: inconsistent handling of exact=False case in to_datetime parsing #50435
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
MarcoGorelli
merged 15 commits into
pandas-dev:main
from
MarcoGorelli:exact-inconsistencies
Dec 31, 2022
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
15 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3de2331
fixup
947353d
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into exact-inconsistencies
e3fe55b
use enum
9e18d33
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into exact-inconsistencies
efeaf7a
more descriptive names
6c51924
renaming fixup
b96158f
cast
0ebff5c
clean up
caa9c90
doc
84eeb3d
correct syntax
f92ff7a
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into exact-inconsistencies
5c67ed3
use typedef
bad704e
check for negative characters remaining
ec6591b
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into exact-inconsistencies
8d8f90e
reduce diff
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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 think this is a good check to keep in place - otherwise these functions get unwieldy
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.
Unfortunately the function is now 522 lines long, whereas the limit for this check is 500
Is it OK to turn it off now, or would you prefer a precursor PR to split up this function?
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.
Hmm not a great solution here. I think OK for now but something we should take care of in a follow up.
Ideally you could change numpy upstream to split the function (maybe split into a date / time parsing functions?). That way we wouldn't diverge too far from them when we bring that downstream
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.
OK I'll see if I can upstream something, thanks!