issue_comments

Table actions

4 rows where issue = 1028110240 and user = 14371165 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 1

  • Illviljan · 4 ✖

issue 1

  • Generator for groupby reductions · 4 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
958177932 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5871#issuecomment-958177932 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5871 IC_kwDOAMm_X845HKKM Illviljan 14371165 2021-11-02T21:23:34Z 2021-11-02T21:23:34Z MEMBER

from __future__ import annotations does not actually directly enable the use of | for union, it changes the semantics of type annotations to postpone evaluation. In particular, you can then put just about anything in the type annotation without having any runtime behavior

pandas uses | and from __future__ import annotations quite frequently in order to avoid the Union, for example: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/blob/master/pandas/plotting/_core.py

Having typing not doing any runtime calculations sounds great to me. We usually don't need the typing variables during runtime anyway.

This can be merged as is. I just think it looks a little neater with |.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Generator for groupby reductions 1028110240
955082380 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5871#issuecomment-955082380 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5871 IC_kwDOAMm_X8447WaM Illviljan 14371165 2021-10-29T22:28:59Z 2021-10-29T22:28:59Z MEMBER

This looks great, nice work!

This can be saved for a future PR but one thing I notice is that it's possible to make the unions slightly more readable using the new |-operator: python dim: Union[None, Hashable, Sequence[Hashable]] = None vs. ```python from future import annotations

dim: None | Hashable | Sequence[Hashable] = None ``` I'm unsure about the compatibility but I think it should be fine.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Generator for groupby reductions 1028110240
950262008 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5871#issuecomment-950262008 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5871 IC_kwDOAMm_X844o9j4 Illviljan 14371165 2021-10-24T05:14:38Z 2021-10-24T05:44:19Z MEMBER

We can probably do the workaround way like in #5624: https://github.com/pydata/xarray/blob/b79155862e154db45dff3b526c2f9e8ef303808f/xarray/core/options.py#L7-L72

But I find typing_extensions getting rather important, most of the time when you google for the typing issue the proper solutions often uses these new typing additions.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Generator for groupby reductions 1028110240
950201382 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5871#issuecomment-950201382 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5871 IC_kwDOAMm_X844ouwm Illviljan 14371165 2021-10-23T19:28:17Z 2021-10-23T19:28:17Z MEMBER 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Generator for groupby reductions 1028110240

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]);