Skip to content
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

REF: use BlockManager.apply for Rolling.count #35883

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Aug 31, 2020

Conversation

jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member

  • closes #xxxx
  • tests added / passed
  • passes black pandas
  • passes git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff
  • whatsnew entry

results = []
for b in blocks:
result = b.notna().astype(int)
_, obj = self._create_blocks(self._selected_obj)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was actually hoping that count could be defined in terms of self._apply so we can have less custom logic

def count(self):
    window_func = self._get_cython_func_type("roll_count")
    return self._apply(window_func, center=self.center, floor=0, name="count", **kwargs)

Might be not as straightforward (possibly) but just a heads up of where (hopefully) count should head.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this something you're planning on doing in the forseeable future? i agree thatd be a nicer solution

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll experiment with this tonight and get a PR up if tests pass

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like this version allows (inconsistently with other rolling function) non-numeric data like datetimes and strings because of the ahead of time coercing with notna().astype(int). Taking longer than expected to tie out tests with using the roll_count cython version

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure if anything can be shared, but it looks like DataFrameGroupBy.count is doing things kludgily blockwise and should also use an apply pattern

@jreback jreback added Refactor Internal refactoring of code Window rolling, ewma, expanding labels Aug 27, 2020
@mroeschke mroeschke added this to the 1.2 milestone Aug 31, 2020
@mroeschke mroeschke merged commit 8f33d73 into pandas-dev:master Aug 31, 2020
@mroeschke
Copy link
Member

Thanks @jbrockmendel. Couldn't find a straightforward simplification immediately, so this is a nice cleanup.

@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel deleted the ref-count-blockwise branch August 31, 2020 19:21
jbrockmendel added a commit to jbrockmendel/pandas that referenced this pull request Aug 31, 2020
* REF: remove unnecesary try/except

* TST: add test for agg on ordered categorical cols (pandas-dev#35630)

* TST: resample does not yield empty groups (pandas-dev#10603) (pandas-dev#35799)

* revert accidental rebase

* REF: use BlockManager.apply for Rolling.count

Co-authored-by: Karthik Mathur <22126205+mathurk1@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tkmz-n <60312218+tkmz-n@users.noreply.github.com>
kesmit13 pushed a commit to kesmit13/pandas that referenced this pull request Nov 2, 2020
* REF: remove unnecesary try/except

* TST: add test for agg on ordered categorical cols (pandas-dev#35630)

* TST: resample does not yield empty groups (pandas-dev#10603) (pandas-dev#35799)

* revert accidental rebase

* REF: use BlockManager.apply for Rolling.count

Co-authored-by: Karthik Mathur <22126205+mathurk1@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tkmz-n <60312218+tkmz-n@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Refactor Internal refactoring of code Window rolling, ewma, expanding
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants