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

add check_output to the CheckResult namedtuple #251

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 27, 2020

Conversation

cosmicBboy
Copy link
Collaborator

the reason for this is to fulfill the use case where the
user wants to use Check objects by themselves and access
the boolean scalar, Series, or DataFrame that the check_fn
function outputs for downstream purposes like visualization
or boolean indexing

the reason for this is to fulfill the use case where the
user wants to use `Check` objects by themselves and access
the boolean scalar, Series, or DataFrame that the `check_fn`
function outputs for downstream purposes like visualization
or boolean indexing
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #251 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #251      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.46%   96.45%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          15       15              
  Lines        1303     1299       -4     
==========================================
- Hits         1257     1253       -4     
  Misses         46       46              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandera/checks.py 98.38% <100.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️

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 486f381...a4247b4. Read the comment docs.

@cosmicBboy cosmicBboy merged commit 58a8bcb into master Jul 27, 2020
@cosmicBboy cosmicBboy deleted the feature/check-output branch August 1, 2020 21:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants