issue_comments

Table actions

3 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 741714847 sorted by updated_at descending

✖
✖
✖

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 3

issue 1

  • Backends entrypoints · 3 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER · 3 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
742507400 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4577#issuecomment-742507400 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4577 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc0MjUwNzQwMA== keewis 14808389 2020-12-10T13:02:36Z 2020-12-10T13:30:42Z MEMBER

no worries, as I said when posting these suggestions I do know that there are different opinions about comprehensions or generator expressions. I could have been more explicit about this, though, I meant to say that you may choose not to apply suggestions you do not agree with.

 
{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Backends entrypoints 741714847
742413228 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4577#issuecomment-742413228 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4577 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc0MjQxMzIyOA== alexamici 226037 2020-12-10T09:55:55Z 2020-12-10T09:55:55Z MEMBER

@keewis WRT your comments on list comprehensions we at B-Open prefer to use them only when they make the code one line and actually prefer explicit loops otherwise.

This is both because we find them more readable as code and because tracebacks as well are easier to parse when they point to the statement that raised.

 
{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Backends entrypoints 741714847
742095829 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4577#issuecomment-742095829 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4577 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc0MjA5NTgyOQ== jhamman 2443309 2020-12-09T22:12:18Z 2020-12-09T22:12:18Z MEMBER

@aurghs - I think we're basically done here. Can you clean up the remaining failing tests and we'll get this merged?

 
{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Backends entrypoints 741714847

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]);