FIX-#4456: fix loc in case when need reindex item #4457
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4457 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 86.82% 89.15% +2.32%
==========================================
Files 222 222
Lines 18038 18746 +708
==========================================
+ Hits 15662 16713 +1051
+ Misses 2376 2033 -343
📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more |
|
|
|
anmyachev
added a commit
to anmyachev/modin
that referenced
this pull request
May 13, 2022
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
anmyachev
commented
May 13, 2022
dchigarev
requested changes
May 14, 2022
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
dchigarev
reviewed
May 18, 2022
| @@ -384,6 +402,45 @@ def test_loc(data): | |||
| modin_df.loc["NO_EXIST"] | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def test_loc_4456(): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is there a chance we can set a pair of (value, key) as a test parameter in order to reduce it? for now the test looks a bit complicated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like I've made it a bit easier :)
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev <anatoliimyachev@mail.com>
dchigarev
reviewed
May 25, 2022
Comment on lines
428
to
433
| df_value = pandas.DataFrame(value, index=index, columns=columns) | ||
| eval_loc(modin_df, pandas_df, df_value, loc_key) | ||
|
|
||
| # modin DataFrame | ||
| mdf_value = pd.DataFrame(df_value) | ||
| eval_loc(modin_df, pandas_df, (mdf_value, df_value), loc_key) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It just seems a bit strange to me that there's no cases for len(key) != len(value) as it was originally a reproducer one :) For now, it's obvious that the made changes should fix those cases as well, but it could be no longer true as our code-base is constantly changing at high-levels. So I would propose to add these cases as well.
I've rewritten this test in a separate branch so it include all of the cases. You can inspect and cherry-pick it here if you would like: dchigarev@67352aa
Signed-off-by: proxodilka <zeeron209@gmail.com>
dchigarev
approved these changes
May 26, 2022
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.
Signed-off-by: Anatoly Myachev anatoliimyachev@mail.com
What do these changes do?
flake8 modin/ asv_bench/benchmarks scripts/doc_checker.pyblack --check modin/ asv_bench/benchmarks scripts/doc_checker.pygit commit -sdocs/development/architecture.rstis up-to-date