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/4221#issuecomment-685920915,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4221,685920915,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY4NTkyMDkxNQ==,19578931,2020-09-02T18:32:45Z,2020-09-02T18:32:45Z,CONTRIBUTOR,@dcherian No problem! Thanks for all your help!,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,656163384
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4221#issuecomment-684052741,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4221,684052741,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY4NDA1Mjc0MQ==,19578931,2020-08-31T21:31:51Z,2020-08-31T21:31:51Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> LGTM. The `reason` for `requires_pint_0_15` would be nice but I don't feel strongly about it so it's up to you.
> 
> Thanks for being patient, @rpmanser.

No worries, thanks for the reviews!","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,656163384
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4221#issuecomment-682306752,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4221,682306752,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY4MjMwNjc1Mg==,19578931,2020-08-28T03:37:36Z,2020-08-28T03:37:36Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"I meant `is_duck_array_or_ndarray`, not `is_duck_dask_array_or_ndarray`. I don't suppose there's a way to fix that at this point?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,656163384
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4221#issuecomment-681182191,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4221,681182191,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY4MTE4MjE5MQ==,19578931,2020-08-26T23:54:18Z,2020-08-26T23:54:18Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Tests are failing in `test_formatting.py` for `test_diff_attrs_repr_with_array`. This looks very similar to the previous problem that was occurring for duck array equality due to NEP18. Is a similar xfail appropriate here?

I'm not sure why FormattingBlack failed. It's claiming that 45 files would be reformatted. I used the pre-commit hook, which passed.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,656163384
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4221#issuecomment-661226607,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4221,661226607,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2MTIyNjYwNw==,19578931,2020-07-20T17:35:31Z,2020-07-20T17:35:31Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"I have erred on the side of leaving the `isinstance` checks in place where @jthielen reviewed them. If it is decided that no further tests are needed, then this should be ready for review.

On another note, if it is appropriate to apply these changes:

> > Revisiting it I now realize that `is_array_like` is actually not a good name for that function: officially, ""array_like"" means that it can be casted using `np.asarray`. Maybe we should rename that to `is_duck_array`? But then we'd also need to check for `__array_ufunc__` and `__array_function__` because we also need those to properly wrap duck arrays.
> 
> As long as that doesn't break any of the current uses, I think that would be the best way forwards. This would require xarray to be on NumPy 1.16+ (in order to ensure `hasattr(np.ndarray, ""__array_function__"")`, but that's only 9 days away by NEP 29, so hopefully that isn't too much of an issue. Then, most of the checks for ""can this be wrapped by xarray"" should be able to become something like
> 
> ```python
> is_duck_array(x) and not isinstance(x, (DataArray, Variable))
> ```
> 
> with `is_duck_dask_array` only being needed for checking Dask Array-like support.

I can do that as well. If not, should a new issue be opened for this?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,656163384
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4221#issuecomment-658946116,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4221,658946116,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY1ODk0NjExNg==,19578931,2020-07-15T19:01:17Z,2020-07-15T19:01:17Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"I'm getting a bit lost within the testing suite while trying to figure out the implications of this change and what kinds of tests are necessary for it. Would a test module for this
- Individually test all functions that include the newly implemented `is_duck_dask_array()`?
- Test that a duck dask Array has attributes of a dask Array and redirects the appropriate methods to those defined by `Variable`, `DataArray`, and `Dataset`?
- Be similar to `test_dask.py`?
- All, some, or none of the above?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,656163384
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4208#issuecomment-656349279,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4208,656349279,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY1NjM0OTI3OQ==,19578931,2020-07-09T21:01:07Z,2020-07-09T21:01:07Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"I can go ahead with putting together a PR for this. Before I do so, I'd like to clarify what is expected.

- Implement the `is_duck_dask_array()` function
- In that implementation, use `dask.base.is_dask_collection()` and the existing duck array check(s)
- Replace `isinstance(x, dask.array.Array)` checks with the new `is_dask_duck_array()` function

I searched for existing duck array checks in xarray and nothing immediately obvious to me is showing up. It looks like a check for `__array_function__` is inappropriate based on discussion in #3917. Could someone point out the proper duck array check?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,653430454