Skip to content

add extra test case in the test_constructor_str_infer_reso #52199

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 25, 2023
Merged

add extra test case in the test_constructor_str_infer_reso #52199

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 25, 2023

Conversation

natmokval
Copy link
Contributor

An extra test case is added to test_constructor_str_infer_reso to check Timestamp('300-01-01').

I suggest doing a parametrization for this test.

@MarcoGorelli
Copy link
Member

Looks good thanks, if you mark as ready for review we can get it in

@natmokval natmokval marked this pull request as ready for review March 25, 2023 15:48
@MarcoGorelli MarcoGorelli added this to the 2.1 milestone Mar 25, 2023
@MarcoGorelli MarcoGorelli added Timestamp pd.Timestamp and associated methods Non-Nano datetime64/timedelta64 with non-nanosecond resolution labels Mar 25, 2023
MarcoGorelli
MarcoGorelli approved these changes Mar 25, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@MarcoGorelli MarcoGorelli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @natmokval !

@MarcoGorelli MarcoGorelli merged commit 710052c into pandas-dev:main Mar 25, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
1 more reviewer

@MarcoGorelli MarcoGorelli MarcoGorelli approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Non-Nano datetime64/timedelta64 with non-nanosecond resolution Timestamp pd.Timestamp and associated methods
Projects
None yet
Milestone
2.1
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

BUG: odd error message when constructing non-nano date_Range without leading zero
2 participants
@natmokval @MarcoGorelli