issue_comments: 442797084
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/1603#issuecomment-442797084 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1603 | 442797084 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0Mjc5NzA4NA== | 4160723 | 2018-11-29T11:15:17Z | 2018-11-29T11:15:17Z | MEMBER |
Looking at the reported issues related to multi-indexes in xarray, I have the same feeling. Simply reusing If we re-design indexes so that we allow 3rd-party indexes, maybe we could support both and let the user choose the one (xarray or pandas baked) that best suits his needs? Regarding MultiIndex as part of the data schema vs an implementation detail, if we support extending indexes (and already given the different kinds of multi-coordinate indexes: MultiIndex, KDTree, etc.), then I think that it should be transparent to the user. However, I don't really see why a multi-coordinate index should have its own variable (with tuples of values). I don't want to speak for others, but IMHO If a variable for each multi-coordinate index is "just" for data schema consistency, then why not showing all those indexes in a separate section of the repr? For example:
It is equally transparent, not more verbose, and it is clear that multi-indexes are not part of the coordinates (in fact there is no need of "virtual" coordinates either, nor to name the index). I don't think single indexes should be shown here as it would results in duplicated, uninformative lines. More generally, here is how I would see indexes handled in xarray (I might be missing important aspects, though):
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
262642978 |