You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I guess, the main motivation behind the current structure was to make it similar to how DependType and DEPEND_TYPE_NAMES is defined. But I would rather also change those definition, than staying with the current solution.
One possible solution would be to create a single dictionary, that stores a mapping from column name to dtype.
The only thing, not directly fitting is the DEPEND_INDEX_DTYPE, as the index is a special column, and we need to see, if we can add it to the dictionary or not.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As stated in #416 (review), our current definition of the column names and dtypes of the dependency table is done not in a nice way:
audb/audb/core/define.py
Lines 23 to 64 in 44df511
I guess, the main motivation behind the current structure was to make it similar to how
DependType
andDEPEND_TYPE_NAMES
is defined. But I would rather also change those definition, than staying with the current solution.One possible solution would be to create a single dictionary, that stores a mapping from column name to dtype.
The only thing, not directly fitting is the
DEPEND_INDEX_DTYPE
, as the index is a special column, and we need to see, if we can add it to the dictionary or not.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: