issue_comments

Table actions

6 rows where author_association = "MEMBER", issue = 391865060 and user = 1217238 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: reactions, created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 1

  • shoyer · 6 ✖

issue 1

  • API for N-dimensional combine · 6 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER · 6 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
505517099 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2616#issuecomment-505517099 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2616 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNTUxNzA5OQ== shoyer 1217238 2019-06-25T16:18:29Z 2019-06-25T16:18:29Z MEMBER

Pushing to a merged PR definitely doesn't work :). You should start a new branch after syncing master.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   API for N-dimensional combine 391865060
505514716 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2616#issuecomment-505514716 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2616 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNTUxNDcxNg== shoyer 1217238 2019-06-25T16:12:03Z 2019-06-25T16:12:03Z MEMBER

I started thinking about names for these functions again....

I don't love the non-descriptive nature of combine_auto and combine_manual. All "auto" and "manual" tells me is that one is more automatic than the other, without saying how it's more automatic. This is probably even more confusing because we used "auto" previously to mean some hybrid behavior between what we now call "manual" and "auto".

What about calling these combine_by_coords and combine_nested instead? On open_mfdataset, these would be combine='by_coords' and combine='nested'.

 
{
    "total_count": 2,
    "+1": 2,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   API for N-dimensional combine 391865060
505490600 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2616#issuecomment-505490600 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2616 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNTQ5MDYwMA== shoyer 1217238 2019-06-25T15:14:54Z 2019-06-25T15:14:54Z MEMBER

OK, in it goes! Thanks @TomNicholas for your perseverance here

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   API for N-dimensional combine 391865060
503199369 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2616#issuecomment-503199369 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2616 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwMzE5OTM2OQ== shoyer 1217238 2019-06-18T15:56:42Z 2019-06-18T15:56:42Z MEMBER

I left a couple of minor comments, but I think this is pretty much ready to go! We should merge this and let users give it a try :).

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   API for N-dimensional combine 391865060
470260814 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2616#issuecomment-470260814 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2616 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ3MDI2MDgxNA== shoyer 1217238 2019-03-06T20:19:32Z 2019-03-06T20:19:32Z MEMBER

If we use combine_auto and combine_manual then it simplifies the deprecation cycle because we can have the old auto_combine and the new combine_auto in the API simultaneously (though maybe that's too confusing).

I think this is a good idea. We can deprecate the old auto_combine but keep it around for now to enable a smooth transition.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   API for N-dimensional combine 391865060
469086121 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2616#issuecomment-469086121 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2616 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ2OTA4NjEyMQ== shoyer 1217238 2019-03-04T01:04:39Z 2019-03-04T01:04:39Z MEMBER

Do we want to stick with the names manual_combine and auto_combine?

Some other possibilities:

  • Instead of manual_combine: concat_nd, concat_nested, multi_concat
  • Instead of auto_combine:assemble, reassemble, combine_sorted, concat_sorted, unify

I guess auto/manual works well with the values of the keyword argument, and makes it clear that these are a different class of operation than the primitive concat and merge. Though if we really want to emphasize the similarity (especially to help auto-complete), we might consider even switching the order of the words, e.g., combine_auto and combine_manual.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   API for N-dimensional combine 391865060

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

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]);