issue_comments: 43538733
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/134#issuecomment-43538733 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/134 | 43538733 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzNTM4NzMz | 1217238 | 2014-05-19T18:23:53Z | 2014-05-19T18:23:53Z | MEMBER | I agree, we should either ensure datetime64[ns] or ensure that operations on datetime objects preserve dtype. The latest commit should verify this. My main reason for not doing the former is that I thought it would be nice (in theory) to support using plain datetime objects if datetime64[ns] does not have a long enough time range for some users. But for most users, I suspect they would indeed rather have datetime64[ns]. |
{
"total_count": 0,
"+1": 0,
"-1": 0,
"laugh": 0,
"hooray": 0,
"confused": 0,
"heart": 0,
"rocket": 0,
"eyes": 0
} |
33772168 |