-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 133
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CLEAN: remove nonpublic stubs #170
Conversation
I guess we follow a "remove first, wait for user issue, create doc issue at pandas, add back"-approach? edit: might not be the best user-experience but it is probably the best way to expand the pandas docs. |
I will raise an issue in the pandas repo to ask if this is a docs oversight, or a coding error. Either it is not supposed to be public, so the code should get fixed, or the docs need to get fixed. If the former, then the change here is fine. If the latter, then most likely no user is going to complain about it until we document it, so removing it now causes no harm. |
Based on this: https://www.programcreek.com/python/example/101338/pandas.value_counts I will put it back in here. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me
Thanks @Dr-Irv ! (When in doubt, I wouldn't mind removing slightly more than necessary: in the worst case we need to add it back but it will slowly make the pandas doc more complete.) |
test_pandas.py:test_unique()
Removals
pd.value_counts()
- while exported, it is not documentedalgorithms.pyi
except forfactorize()
andunique()
pd.api.extensions.take
- not documentedpandas.core
:apply.pyi
,sorting.pyi
,nanops.pyi
- nothing there is publicRefinements
pd.unique()
- added tests and overloads based on the docs