issue_comments

Table actions

2 rows where issue = 715374721 and user = 35919497 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

  • aurghs · 2 ✖

issue 1

  • Group together decoding options into a single argument · 2 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
718346664 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4490#issuecomment-718346664 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4490 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDcxODM0NjY2NA== aurghs 35919497 2020-10-29T04:07:46Z 2020-10-29T04:07:46Z COLLABORATOR

Taking into account the comments in this issue and the calls, I would propose this solution: https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4547

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Group together decoding options into a single argument 715374721
704607745 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4490#issuecomment-704607745 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4490 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDcwNDYwNzc0NQ== aurghs 35919497 2020-10-06T23:35:30Z 2020-10-06T23:35:30Z COLLABORATOR

I agree, open_dataset() currently has a very long signature that should be changed. The interface you proposed is obviously clearer, but a class could give a false idea that all backends support all the decoding options listed in the class. I see two other alternatives: - Instead of a class we could use a dictionary. Pros 1, 2 and 3 would still hold. - With the interface proposed by @alexamici in #4309 the pros 2 and 3 would still hold and partially 1 (since the open_dataset interface would be greatly simplified).

For both these proposals, we would lose the autocompletion with the tab but, on the other hand, the user would be relieved of managing a class. Finally, I'm not sure that for the user it would be clear the separation between backend_kwargs and decode, since they both contain arguments that will be passed to the backend. Especially if the backend needs more specific decoding options that must be set in backend_kwargs. In this sense, #4309 seems less error-prone.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Group together decoding options into a single argument 715374721

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]);