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

BUG: show time values in repr of high precision DatetimeIndex #19109

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jan 7, 2018

Conversation

reidy-p
Copy link
Contributor

@reidy-p reidy-p commented Jan 6, 2018

On master:

In [2]: pd.DatetimeIndex(['2017-01-01 23:59:59.999999999'])
Out[2]:  DatetimeIndex(['2017-01-01'], dtype='datetime64[ns]', freq=None)

On my branch:

In [3]: pd.DatetimeIndex(['2017-01-01 23:59:59.999999999'])
Out[3]: DatetimeIndex(['2017-01-01 23:59:59.999999999'], dtype='datetime64[ns]', freq=None)

It seems that it's only a problem when the time value was 23:59:59.999999999 or very similar, but I may need to add some more tests to check this further.

@@ -883,6 +883,20 @@ def test_datetimelike_frame(self):
'[10 rows x 2 columns]')
assert repr(df) == expected

def test_datetimeindex_highprecision(self):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

see if you can parametrize this checking each digit of precision

@@ -374,7 +374,8 @@ Conversion
- Bug in :class:`TimedeltaIndex` where division by a ``Series`` would return a ``TimedeltaIndex`` instead of a ``Series`` (issue:`19042`)
- Bug in :class:`Series` with ``dtype='timedelta64[ns]`` where addition or subtraction of ``TimedeltaIndex`` could return a ``Series`` with an incorrect name (issue:`19043`)
- Fixed bug where comparing :class:`DatetimeIndex` failed to raise ``TypeError`` when attempting to compare timezone-aware and timezone-naive datetimelike objects (:issue:`18162`)
-
- Bug in :class:`DatetimeIndex` where the repr was not showing the time values for the end of the day (:issue:`19030`)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

make this more clear

@jreback jreback added Output-Formatting __repr__ of pandas objects, to_string Timeseries labels Jan 6, 2018
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 7, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #19109 into master will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #19109      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.51%   91.53%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         148      148              
  Lines       48753    48753              
==========================================
+ Hits        44616    44628      +12     
+ Misses       4137     4125      -12
Flag Coverage Δ
#multiple 89.91% <ø> (+0.02%) ⬆️
#single 41.6% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandas/io/formats/format.py 96.24% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pandas/plotting/_converter.py 66.95% <0%> (+1.73%) ⬆️

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 36a71eb...aaa1f0c. Read the comment docs.

@pep8speaks
Copy link

pep8speaks commented Jan 7, 2018

Hello @reidy-p! Thanks for updating the PR.

Cheers ! There are no PEP8 issues in this Pull Request. 🍻

Comment last updated on January 07, 2018 at 12:38 Hours UTC

@jreback jreback added this to the 0.23.0 milestone Jan 7, 2018
@jreback jreback merged commit fe66b56 into pandas-dev:master Jan 7, 2018
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Jan 7, 2018

thanks @reidy-p

@reidy-p reidy-p deleted the datetimeindex_repr branch January 7, 2018 15:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Output-Formatting __repr__ of pandas objects, to_string Timeseries
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

BUG: repr on DTI with high precision is wrong
3 participants