Enable boolean masking through nest accessor #329
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #329 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 98.08% 98.11% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 18 18
Lines 1724 1748 +24
==========================================
+ Hits 1691 1715 +24
Misses 33 33 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Click here to view all benchmarks. |
|
Check out this pull request on See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks. Powered by ReviewNB |
dougbrn
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Allows boolean masking through the nest accessor, e.g.:
nf["nested"].nest[nf["nested.t"] < 5]Takes a step towards #274, but wouldn't neccesarily say this resolves it. As we discussed, this step is mainly to see how the implementation feels when centered on the .nest accessor, but we may move to a more direct nested series implementation #304 in the future
Performance looks comparable to NestedFrame.query, with a bit less overhead perhaps