issue_comments: 1373101988

This data as json

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/7418#issuecomment-1373101988 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7418 1373101988 IC_kwDOAMm_X85R19-k 35968931 2023-01-06T03:35:36Z 2023-01-06T03:35:36Z MEMBER

Would it mean that if someone wants to later add any feature "x" or "y" into Xarray, they just need implementing the feature for Dataset (and possibly DataArray) and it will be guaranteed to work with Datatree?

Basically yes, it would immediately work with Datatree. Datatree currently implements most dataset methods by literally copying them and their docstrings, and they work by mapping the method over every node in the tree. We could integrate Datatree in such a way that the additional developer effort to get a method on dataset working on Datatree would be negligible (think adding a single element with the method name to an internal list, or copy-pasting a docstring).

I don't think it is ideal to have such non-synchronized state within Xarray itself.

This is an argument for waiting before integrating.

I'm just speaking generally from my experience of having struggled while doing some heavy refactoring in Xarray recently :)

I appreciate the input @benbovy! I think the main difference between this effort and your (heroic) indexes effort is that Datatree doesn't touch any existing API.

I guess my main concern is that integrating prematurely into Xarray might give a false sense of stability - I don't want to later realize I should redesign Datatree, and have people be annoyed because they thought it was as stable as the rest of xarray.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   1519552711