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

cum_transform_feature Docstrings #494

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Apr 18, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@glentennis
Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 13, 2019

Rewriting docstrings in cum_transform_feature.py to include a full description and doctest.

@codecov

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 13, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #494 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #494   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.09%   96.09%           
=======================================
  Files         108      108           
  Lines        8862     8862           
=======================================
  Hits         8516     8516           
  Misses        346      346
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...tools/primitives/standard/cum_transform_feature.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3bfc61c...a025ae4. Read the comment docs.

@gsheni gsheni self-requested a review Apr 16, 2019

@gsheni gsheni assigned gsheni and unassigned gsheni Apr 16, 2019

@gsheni

gsheni approved these changes Apr 16, 2019

@glentennis glentennis force-pushed the glentennis:CumSum-docstrings branch from 41c95c7 to 7993779 Apr 17, 2019

@glentennis

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 17, 2019

@kmax12 I edited the descriptions and doctests to be more clear about the way NaN values are handled, let me know what you think!

Also, I noticed the way NaN values are handled in CumMean might not be optimal. NaN values in a window are treated as zero, so when given the list [1, None, 1], CumMean returns:

[1, nan, .66]

When perhaps we would expect it to return

[1, nan, 1]

should i open an issue to fix this?

@glentennis glentennis force-pushed the glentennis:CumSum-docstrings branch from 19df93a to 7993779 Apr 17, 2019

glentennis and others added some commits Apr 17, 2019

@kmax12

kmax12 approved these changes Apr 18, 2019

Copy link
Member

left a comment

LGTM

@gsheni gsheni merged commit fd4145c into Featuretools:master Apr 18, 2019

4 checks passed

codecov/patch Coverage not affected when comparing 3bfc61c...a025ae4
Details
codecov/project 96.09% remains the same compared to 3bfc61c
Details
license/cla Contributor License Agreement is signed.
Details
test_all_python_versions Workflow: test_all_python_versions
Details

@rwedge rwedge referenced this pull request Apr 24, 2019

Merged

v0.7.1 #507

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.