issue_comments: 159757208
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/issues/641#issuecomment-159757208 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/641 | 159757208 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDE1OTc1NzIwOA== | 1217238 | 2015-11-25T23:45:22Z | 2015-11-25T23:45:22Z | MEMBER | Yes, of course :). Sometimes still a useful way to think about things, though maybe it's better not to encourage it. I think it's a similar situation for an explicit Python loop vs Cython for groupby aggregations, but the Python loop actually works OK much of the time (e.g., we use it in xray because we haven't written nd grouped aggregated in Cython or Numba yet). On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Jeff Reback notifications@github.com wrote:
|
{
"total_count": 0,
"+1": 0,
"-1": 0,
"laugh": 0,
"hooray": 0,
"confused": 0,
"heart": 0,
"rocket": 0,
"eyes": 0
} |
113499493 |