issue_comments: 845845472
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/4118#issuecomment-845845472 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4118 | 845845472 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg0NTg0NTQ3Mg== | 6772352 | 2021-05-21T10:15:13Z | 2021-05-21T10:17:00Z | NONE | A simple comment/question: In xarray.Dataset, why not just use the Unix-path notation into a "flat" dict model? Actually, netCDF4 implements this Unix-like path access to groups and variables: All of the hierarchical stuff (e.g., getting a sub-Dataset from a random group) and conventions (e.g., dimensions scoping rule) would then be driven by the parsing of strings only. It's all about symbolic names (like in a file system right?) and there would be not any hierarchical data in memory anymore. My question is then: Are there some tricky points for xarray.Dataset not to go this simple way? Some related remarks:
- About the attribute access to variables: I don't really know why this exist at all since it is all about mixing unrelated namespaces: (1) the class internals and (2) the user's variables one. Mixing namespaces seems very bad to me: it makes some variable names forbidden in order to avoid any collision between the two namespaces, it usually imply unnecessarily complex code with corner cases to deal with.
- About netCDF4 being a self-described format: xarray API has |
{
"total_count": 0,
"+1": 0,
"-1": 0,
"laugh": 0,
"hooray": 0,
"confused": 0,
"heart": 0,
"rocket": 0,
"eyes": 0
} |
628719058 |