-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18k
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
Date time index.indexer between time #43602
Date time index.indexer between time #43602
Conversation
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.
see my comments we need to deprecate
@@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ def indexer_at_time(self, time, asof: bool = False) -> npt.NDArray[np.intp]: | |||
return (time_micros == micros).nonzero()[0] | |||
|
|||
def indexer_between_time( | |||
self, start_time, end_time, include_start: bool = True, include_end: bool = True | |||
self, start_time, end_time, inclusive="both" |
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.
this is public api, need to deprecate the inlucde_start/end args.
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.
Not sure what do I need to do here. Here's what I think I should do:
(1) Add a deprecate directive for old args (include_start, include_end
).
(2) Add a line to show deprecation of old args in whatsnew
.
An issue with (1) is that the only function calling indexer_between_time
is between_time
. So, maintaining functionality with old args would just be extra code as we can just modify between_time
and pass inclusive
instead of include_start, include_end
when indexer_between_time
is called.
Please let me know what do you think @jreback :)
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.
- yes
- yes
then what you do is you change the call to indexer_between_time`` to use the *new* api (so you don't get a deprecation warning in
between_time`
can you merge master and address comments |
I'm sorry for the absence! I'd been away due to some work. @jreback I did leave a comment in my OLD PR addressing why the tests are failing in THIS PR. Can you please take a look at it? I'm not sure what my course of action should be going ahead. |
|
Yes, indeed I can reproduce the failing test case locally. However, what I'm confused about is the absence of a code block from Can you please let me know why I can see the below code block in this PR, but NOT on the master branch.?
Edit: I'm not sure if this is a bad question but can you please address this @jreback |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for thirty days with no activity. Please update or respond to this comment if you're still interested in working on this. |
Yes I am willing.
… On Nov 5, 2021, at 1:04 AM, github-actions[bot] ***@***.***> wrote:
This pull request is stale because it has been open for thirty days with no activity. Please update or respond to this comment if you're still interested in working on this.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.
|
@suyashgupta01 can you merge master and update to comments |
Thanks for the PR, but it appears to have gone stale. If you could merge master and address the reviews we would be happy to reopen. Closing. |
Please take a look and let me know if things look fine, I'll make a whatsnew entry then :)
This PR has been made as per this suggestion by @attack68.