issue_comments

Table actions

6 rows where issue = 966983801 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

  • Explicit indexes · 6 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
1071104882 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-1071104882 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5692 IC_kwDOAMm_X84_18Ny shoyer 1217238 2022-03-17T17:12:07Z 2022-03-17T17:12:07Z MEMBER

OK, in it goes! Big thanks to @benbovy for seeing this through :)

 
{
    "total_count": 24,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 13,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 1,
    "rocket": 10,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Explicit indexes 966983801
1069344000 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-1069344000 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5692 IC_kwDOAMm_X84_vOUA shoyer 1217238 2022-03-16T16:47:45Z 2022-03-16T16:47:45Z MEMBER

OK, I think we’re good to go here?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Explicit indexes 966983801
1059662347 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-1059662347 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5692 IC_kwDOAMm_X84_KSoL shoyer 1217238 2022-03-05T03:05:36Z 2022-03-05T03:05:36Z MEMBER

I would like to merge this PR very soon so it can get testing before the next release. If anyone has any remaining concerns, please speak up!

 
{
    "total_count": 5,
    "+1": 5,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Explicit indexes 966983801
954003380 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-954003380 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5692 IC_kwDOAMm_X8443O-0 shoyer 1217238 2021-10-28T16:23:08Z 2021-10-28T16:23:08Z MEMBER

I don't know when it will stop. I'm feeling exhausted right now :(.

I really appreciate your effortss here! This is a giant refactoring PR. It's very important work but I know it can be hard to land.

I wonder if there are things we could do to make this easier to land -- maybe we could defer some of these fixes to a later PR, if we wait on disabling implicit indexes?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Explicit indexes 966983801
914419518 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-914419518 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5692 IC_kwDOAMm_X842gO8- shoyer 1217238 2021-09-07T15:44:46Z 2021-09-07T15:45:03Z MEMBER

My suggestion:

Don't include keyword arguments inside the base class: python class Index: def query(self, labels): raise NotImplementedError()

Still include custom keyword arguments on subclass query() methods.

Use # type: ignore inside xarray, when we call query()

 
{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Explicit indexes 966983801
907281385 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-907281385 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5692 IC_kwDOAMm_X842FAPp shoyer 1217238 2021-08-27T15:21:16Z 2021-08-27T15:21:16Z MEMBER

+1 for a class!

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 2:33 AM Benoit Bovy @.***> wrote:

With the latest commits, the return type of Index.query() starts to look ugly:

Tuple[Mapping[str, Any], Optional[IndexWithVars]] where IndexWithVars = Tuple["Index", Optional[IndexVars]]

We need to return:

  • positional indexers in the form {"dim_1": [...], "dim_2": [...]}
  • optionally a new Index object
  • optionally new index variable objects
  • perhaps we should also explicitly return the dimensions to rename (e.g., when only one level of the multi-index remains) instead of inferring it later from the returned index variable(s)?

I think anIndexQueryResults class would be better to hold all this information in a cleaner way. What do you think @shoyer https://github.com/shoyer?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5692#issuecomment-907066176, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJJFVXV7E2SLUNQMEXVJQTT65LVHANCNFSM5B63RXLQ . 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Explicit indexes 966983801

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]);