issue_comments
4 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 182667672 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- center=True for xarray.DataArray.rolling() · 4 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
254347566 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1046#issuecomment-254347566 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1046 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDI1NDM0NzU2Ng== | jhamman 2443309 | 2016-10-17T22:00:32Z | 2016-10-17T22:00:32Z | MEMBER | I'm fine with this approach for now. It would be great if we could convince bottleneck to help us out with a keyword argument of some kind. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
center=True for xarray.DataArray.rolling() 182667672 | |
253929482 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1046#issuecomment-253929482 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1046 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDI1MzkyOTQ4Mg== | shoyer 1217238 | 2016-10-14T21:56:42Z | 2016-10-14T21:56:51Z | MEMBER | @chunweiyuan I agree, this seems worth doing, and I think you have a pretty sensible approach here. For large arrays (especially with ndim > 1), this should add only minimal performance overhead. If you can fit this into the existing framework for |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
center=True for xarray.DataArray.rolling() 182667672 | |
253408063 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1046#issuecomment-253408063 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1046 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDI1MzQwODA2Mw== | jhamman 2443309 | 2016-10-13T03:58:32Z | 2016-10-13T03:58:32Z | MEMBER | We do try to stay consistent with pandas except for the last position. Here's the unit test where we verify that behavior. Using ``` Python In [1]: import pandas as pd s In [2]: data = pd.Series([0, 3, 6]) In [3]: data.rolling(3, center=True, min_periods=1).mean() Out[3]: 0 1.5 1 3.0 2 4.5 ``` If I remember correctly, and my brain is a bit like mush right now so I could be wrong,
So, as you can see, bottleneck does something totally different that wouldn't otherwise work with |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
center=True for xarray.DataArray.rolling() 182667672 | |
253405068 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1046#issuecomment-253405068 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1046 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDI1MzQwNTA2OA== | shoyer 1217238 | 2016-10-13T03:37:55Z | 2016-10-13T03:37:55Z | MEMBER | I think we mostly tried to make this consistent with pandas. To be honest I don't entirely understand the logic myself. Cc @jhamman |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
center=True for xarray.DataArray.rolling() 182667672 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] ( [html_url] TEXT, [issue_url] TEXT, [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id]) ); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue] ON [issue_comments] ([issue]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user] ON [issue_comments] ([user]);
user 2