issue_comments
3 rows where author_association = "MEMBER", issue = 857947050 and user = 6628425 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: reactions, created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- Calendar utilities · 3 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
953231867 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5155#issuecomment-953231867 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5155 | IC_kwDOAMm_X8440Sn7 | spencerkclark 6628425 | 2021-10-27T19:12:31Z | 2021-10-27T19:12:31Z | MEMBER |
Yeah, I think that could be something good to strive for, and it's exciting that the explicit indexes refactor could facilitate that. To be clear, are you ok with merging #5233 and waiting until after the refactor is complete to discuss future plans there? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Calendar utilities 857947050 | |
825305166 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5155#issuecomment-825305166 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5155 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDgyNTMwNTE2Ng== | spencerkclark 6628425 | 2021-04-23T00:45:56Z | 2021-04-23T00:45:56Z | MEMBER | Great, thanks!
I might actually lean toward your original thought, i.e. having (There is of course the complication that the NumPy dates could have been decoded from a file with a calendar attribute of |
{ "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Calendar utilities 857947050 | |
820832966 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/5155#issuecomment-820832966 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5155 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDgyMDgzMjk2Ng== | spencerkclark 6628425 | 2021-04-16T00:54:09Z | 2021-04-16T00:54:28Z | MEMBER | Thanks for opening up this discussion @aulemahal! It's great to see the boundaries being pushed on what can be done with cftime dates in xarray.
I think something like this would be cool too (see the end of https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4092#discussion_r439101051). Attributes on the
Both
We actually considered something like this in the initial stages of writing Using the calendar argument, as opposed to the range of the dates, to decide what type to return is a slightly different twist than what was discussed previously. I don't know how I feel about that. On one hand I can see why it would be convenient, but on the other hand Would that work for your use-case? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Calendar utilities 857947050 |
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 1