Skip to content
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

BUG: fix construction from read-only non-ns datetime64 numpy array #34844

Merged
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions doc/source/whatsnew/v1.1.0.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -843,6 +843,9 @@ Datetimelike
- Bug in :meth:`DatetimeIndex.intersection` and :meth:`TimedeltaIndex.intersection` with results not having the correct ``name`` attribute (:issue:`33904`)
- Bug in :meth:`DatetimeArray.__setitem__`, :meth:`TimedeltaArray.__setitem__`, :meth:`PeriodArray.__setitem__` incorrectly allowing values with ``int64`` dtype to be silently cast (:issue:`33717`)
- Bug in subtracting :class:`TimedeltaIndex` from :class:`Period` incorrectly raising ``TypeError`` in some cases where it should succeed and ``IncompatibleFrequency`` in some cases where it should raise ``TypeError`` (:issue:`33883`)
- Bug in constructing a Series or Index from a read-only NumPy array with non-ns
resolution which converted to object dtype instead of coercing to ``datetime64[ns]``
dtype when within the timestamp bounds (:issue:`34843`).
- The ``freq`` keyword in :class:`Period`, :func:`date_range`, :func:`period_range`, :func:`pd.tseries.frequencies.to_offset` no longer allows tuples, pass as string instead (:issue:`34703`)

Timedelta
Expand Down
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion pandas/_libs/tslibs/conversion.pyx
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -167,7 +167,8 @@ def ensure_datetime64ns(arr: ndarray, copy: bool=True):
"""
cdef:
Py_ssize_t i, n = arr.size
int64_t[:] ivalues, iresult
const int64_t[:] ivalues
int64_t[:] iresult
NPY_DATETIMEUNIT unit
npy_datetimestruct dts

Expand Down
24 changes: 24 additions & 0 deletions pandas/tests/base/test_constructors.py
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,6 +13,19 @@
from pandas.core.base import NoNewAttributesMixin, PandasObject


@pytest.fixture(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jorisvandenbossche if you hadn’t merged this so quickly i would have objected here

creating this fixture for a single use is not that great

we typically also call this klass and don’t much care about dataframe-dict here

params=[
Series,
lambda x, **kwargs: DataFrame({"a": x}, **kwargs)["a"],
lambda x, **kwargs: DataFrame(x, **kwargs)[0],
Index,
],
ids=["Series", "DataFrame-dict", "DataFrame-array", "Index"],
)
def constructor(request):
return request.param


class TestPandasDelegate:
class Delegator:
_properties = ["foo"]
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -145,3 +158,14 @@ def test_constructor_datetime_outofbound(self, a, klass):
msg = "Out of bounds"
with pytest.raises(pd.errors.OutOfBoundsDatetime, match=msg):
klass(a, dtype="datetime64[ns]")

def test_constructor_datetime_nonns(self, constructor):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

add the issue number

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See a few lines below

arr = np.array(["2020-01-01T00:00:00.000000"], dtype="datetime64[us]")
expected = constructor(pd.to_datetime(["2020-01-01"]))
result = constructor(arr)
tm.assert_equal(result, expected)

# https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/issues/34843
arr.flags.writeable = False
result = constructor(arr)
tm.assert_equal(result, expected)