html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,performed_via_github_app,issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4974#issuecomment-1047997999,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4974,1047997999,IC_kwDOAMm_X84-dy4v,4160723,2022-02-22T16:47:01Z,2022-02-22T16:47:01Z,MEMBER,"I was wondering what is the status of this PR?

@fujiisoup do you still plan to work on it? Or maybe is it wise to wait for the indexes refactoring (#5692), i.e., https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3868#issuecomment-1047947800 and revisit a bit the approach?

More specifically, the approach here (i.e., passing indexes via the `pad_width` argument) may be tricky in the context of flexible indexes where multiple indexes/coordinates are allowed for one dimension.

What about another parameter `data_values` to explicitly pass values to certain (coordinate) variables? It would accept something like `{var_name: (before_values, after_values)}` and would be passed to an `Index.pad` new method (if  `var_name` is a coordinate with an index) or to `Variable.pad` as a fallback. This would keep `pad_width` simple. We'd just need to check that the arrays passed in `data_values` have dimensions matching with the dimensions of the corresponding variables and have sizes or shapes matching with the sizes specified in `pad_width`.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,818583834