DOC: Updating operators docstrings #20415

ParfaitG · 2018-03-20T02:01:36Z

Checklist for the pandas documentation sprint (ignore this if you are doing
an unrelated PR):

PR title is "DOC: update the docstring"
The validation script passes: scripts/validate_docstrings.py <your-function-or-method>
The PEP8 style check passes: git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff
The html version looks good: python doc/make.py --single <your-function-or-method>
It has been proofread on language by another sprint participant

Please include the output of the validation script below between the "```" ticks:

################################################################################
####################### Docstring (pandas.DataFrame.gt)  #######################
################################################################################

Wrapper for flexible comparison methods gt

Examples
--------

>>> df1 = pd.DataFrame({'num1': range(1,6),
...                     'num2': range(2,11,2),
...                     'num3': range(1,20,4)})
>>> df1
   num1  num2  num3
0     1     2     1
1     2     4     5
2     3     6     9
3     4     8    13
4     5    10    17
>>> df2 = pd.DataFrame({'num1': range(6,11),
...                     'num2': range(1,10,2),
...                     'num3': range(1,20,4)})
>>> df2
   num1  num2  num3
0     6     1     1
1     7     3     5
2     8     5     9
3     9     7    13
4    10     9    17
>>> df1.gt(df2)
    num1  num2   num3
0  False  True  False
1  False  True  False
2  False  True  False
3  False  True  False
4  False  True  False

################################################################################
################################## Validation ##################################
################################################################################

Errors found:
	Closing quotes should be placed in the line after the last text in the docstring (do not close the quotes in the same line as the text, or leave a blank line between the last text and the quotes)
	Use only one blank line to separate sections or paragraphs
	Summary does not end with dot
	No extended summary found
	Errors in parameters section
		Parameters {'other', 'level', 'axis'} not documented
	No returns section found
	See Also section not found

################################################################################
####################### Docstring (pandas.DataFrame.ge)  #######################
################################################################################

Wrapper for flexible comparison methods ge

Examples
--------

>>> df1 = pd.DataFrame({'num1': range(1,6),
...                     'num2': range(2,11,2),
...                     'num3': range(1,20,4)})
>>> df1
   num1  num2  num3
0     1     2     1
1     2     4     5
2     3     6     9
3     4     8    13
4     5    10    17
>>> df2 = pd.DataFrame({'num1': range(6,11),
...                     'num2': range(1,10,2),
...                     'num3': range(1,20,4)})
>>> df2
   num1  num2  num3
0     6     1     1
1     7     3     5
2     8     5     9
3     9     7    13
4    10     9    17
>>> df1.ge(df2)
    num1  num2   num3
0  False  True   True
1  False  True   True
2  False  True   True
3  False  True   True
4  False  True   True

################################################################################
################################## Validation ##################################
################################################################################

Errors found:
	Closing quotes should be placed in the line after the last text in the docstring (do not close the quotes in the same line as the text, or leave a blank line between the last text and the quotes)
	Use only one blank line to separate sections or paragraphs
	Summary does not end with dot
	No extended summary found
	Errors in parameters section
		Parameters {'other', 'axis', 'level'} not documented
	No returns section found
	See Also section not found

If the validation script still gives errors, but you think there is a good reason to deviate in this case (and there are certainly such cases), please state this explicitly.

This PR follows up on previous attempt: #20291. Please see discussion.

Specifically, comparison methods in ops.py including .gt() and .ge() do not have standard docstring like other methods. They use a generalized wrapper summary line. This pull request simply adds examples by conditionally building docstring with examples. General changes include: adding global string variable, _flex_comp_doc_FRAME and if logic to the method, _flex_comp_method_FRAME.

pandas doc ops.py update for Comparison Methods df examples

codecov · 2018-03-20T03:27:13Z

Codecov Report

Merging #20415 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #20415      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   42.46%   42.46%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         161      161              
  Lines       51557    51556       -1     
==========================================
- Hits        21892    21891       -1     
  Misses      29665    29665

Flag	Coverage Δ
#single	`42.46% <100%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/core/ops.py	`55.2% <100%> (-0.06%)`	⬇️

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 b45eb26...6879e89. Read the comment docs.

jbrockmendel · 2018-07-16T05:46:14Z

This looks close to ready. Pls rebase.

jbrockmendel

See comments inline.

jbrockmendel · 2018-07-16T05:42:12Z

pandas/core/ops.py

@@ -582,6 +642,14 @@ def _get_op_name(op, special):
 DataFrame.{reverse}
 """

+_flex_comp_doc_FRAME = """
+Wrapper for flexible comparison methods {name}


This could use a description of what “flexible” means in this context.

We maintained original text and only added examples. Please advise on text changes.

jbrockmendel · 2018-07-16T05:42:53Z

pandas/core/ops.py

    'ge': {'op': '>=',
           'desc': 'Greater than or equal to',
           'reverse': None,
-           'df_examples': None}}
+           'df_examples': _ge_example_FRAME}}


Any reason why you chose these two?

This was part of the Pandas Doc Sprint some months ago. I was tasked with ge/gt functions with teammates handling others. But we can incorporate le/lt and eq/ne pairs with similar set of examples.

jbrockmendel · 2018-07-16T05:44:27Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+4     5    10    17
+>>> df2 = pd.DataFrame({'num1': range(6,11),
+...                     'num2': range(1,10,2),
+...                     'num3': range(1,20,4)})


In case the doc linter cares,about it, add spaces after commas here

Pls add a space after each of the commas in the range calls.

jbrockmendel · 2018-07-21T22:22:01Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+        if op_desc['df_examples'] is not None:
+            base_doc = _flex_comp_doc_FRAME
+            doc = base_doc.format(name=op_name,
+                                  df_examples=op_desc['df_examples'])


Pls add a .strip() to op_desc['df_examples']

jbrockmendel · 2018-07-21T22:22:44Z

Needs rebase. Aside from that and two small requested edits, this is ready pending OK from @datapythonista .

datapythonista · 2018-07-21T23:41:29Z

Thanks for the contribution @ParfaitG.

Your examples look good, but if you have time it'd be cool to add some extra stuff to this PR (sorry we couldn't provide more clear information during the sprint).

I'd personally reuse a single docstring for eq, ne, gt, gte, lt, lte. I think we could provide a bit longer description, mainly for new users, but also explain how these methods are more flexible than the equivalent operators (==, !=, >...) as the axis and levels can be specified.

Then, it'd be good to have the Parameters section.

Also, the See Also section can be included to link to all these methods sharing the docstring.

For the examples, what you did looks good, but it could help the users if the dataframes are a bit smaller (something like 2 cols and 3 rows), and the example is a bit more meaningful (e.g. instead of columns num1... a value that users can understand and quickly compare between dataframes).

How does this sound?

…arison operators

pep8speaks · 2018-07-22T20:21:57Z

Hello @ParfaitG! Thanks for updating the PR.

There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/core/ops.py !

Comment last updated on September 27, 2018 at 23:44 Hours UTC

ParfaitG · 2018-07-22T20:38:59Z

Understood @datapythonista ... please see updated PR with a more comprehensive revision on the comparison operators.

datapythonista

Thanks for the changes @ParfaitG, looking much better now. I'd still change some things, mainly to simplify the code.

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T20:43:01Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+_eq_example_FRAME = """
+>>> df1 = pd.DataFrame({'tool': ['python', 'r', 'julia'],
+...                     'score': [100, 200, 300]},
+...                     columns=['tool', 'score'])


you don't need to specify columns, they are already taken from the dictionary keys.

Columns specify order here as score will precede tool due to alphabetical order. But I will adjust with new examples.

Good point, in that case I'd use a list of tuples, with the columns argument. But just a personal opinion, whatever you find clearer.

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T20:53:06Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+     tool  score
+0  python    100
+1       r    200
+2   julia    300


We don't want to create controversy with other languages, or give the idea that Python is competing with them. I know it's a bit exagerated, but let's better avoid this example.

I like how it makes easier to understand the point, than with the random data. But I find slightly misleading that the languages are not the labels, and that the dataframes are compared with the rows sorted in a different way.

I know it's very hard to find great examples (I know by experience, still couldn't find good ones for some docstrings I'm working on). But let's see if we can find something better.

It just came to my mind that we could have two dataframes, predicted_gdp and actual_gdp, with couple of countries as rows, and couple of years as columns. I think that could be a quite realistic example. Or something similar, but that solves the resorting of the columns trickiness.

Understood. Will add a new example. Just thought in the spirit of open source!

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T20:56:03Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+   tool  score
+0  True  False
+1  True   True
+2  True   True


Personally I think that more than having a simple example for each docstring, we could also reuse the examples. So, we create the dataframes once, and we show the methods (not necessarily all, I'm sure the users will be able to extrapolate).

And what it would be nice, is to show in examples what the parameters do, and how they change the results.

All examples uses the same df1 and df2. But I will work on showing the use of rows and columns axis args.

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T20:59:20Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+Parameters
+----------
+other : DataFrame
+axis : {{0, 1, 'columns', 'rows'}}


Here you can check an example on how we usually document the axis values. Also, it would be nice to have description for both other and axis.

Actually I pulled these two args from Series.ge doc (which in hindsight needs work as well since its example uses .add)

yep, still plenty of work in many docstrings, but we're getting closer. :)

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T20:59:49Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+
+Returns
+-------
+result : DataFrame


you can leave just the type, DataFrame of bool would be perfect

Sounds good.

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T21:00:58Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+Returns
+-------
+result : DataFrame
+    Consisting of boolean values


it's a bit redundant, but a bit more explanation, like "Result of the comparison.". Note the period at the end.

Even better.

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T21:07:12Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+DataFrame.gt : Return DataFrame of boolean values strictly greater
+    than to the elementwise rows or columns of one DataFrame to
+    another
+"""


I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but is this always the same for all methods? It could go directly to the doctring and not in a separate variable if that's the case. Besides good docstrings, it's good if we keep the code as simple as possible. So we usually leave the same See Also for all methods in this case, even if the method being documented is self referencing.

Also, do you think we can find something less verbose for the descriptions. Something like Compare DataFrames for equality elementwise may be?

Though much of the words are the same, they differ slightly in the middle. Are you advising removing descriptions?

No, what I meant is that if it's possible, it'd be good that each of these descriptions is shorter. Just making them more concise if you find the way.

datapythonista · 2018-07-22T21:08:31Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+
+See also
+--------
+{reverse}


See Also should go before examples. Also, note the capital A.

Can you run ./scripts/validate_docstring.py pandas.DataFrame.eq after the next set of changes to validate these details?

You are right. And strangely errors did not mention the order of See Also (possibly capitalization of A was the issue?).

We still need to add several validations to that script. The order of the sections is one of them.

datapythonista · 2018-07-30T09:44:09Z

Thanks for the update @ParfaitG. It looks better, but as we discussed before, I don't think it is as useful to have the example of each comparison in each page, than to show well why the methods exists, how they are different from the operators, and how you can use them on different axis.

Yesterday I was working on a tutorial that among other things covers this. You can take a look at the pandas DataFrame section to get the idea of what I mean: https://github.com/datapythonista/pandas-tutorials/blob/master/02_Data_structures.ipynb

What I think we should do: Get rid of all the _eq_example_FRAME... variables, and move the example to the main docstring (just one method to start with). Same for _comp_others. If I'm not missing anything, the same exact content is being using in every docstring anyway (so, there is no value on keeping it in a separate variable).

Then, the example should show:

Comparing with a scalar (other parameter) and the rest of parameters by default.
Comparing with another DataFrame.
Comparing with Series, show how the axis parameter changes the behavior.
Comparing with a MultiIndex, show how the level parameter changes the behavior.
Showing the cases where the operator is equivalent to the method

As there are many cases to show, you can keep using the different methods in each of them, so more or less all them are covered. Meaning that when you compare with a scalar you can use eq, when you compare with a DataFrame you can use gt, and so on.

Let me know how does this sound, and if there is anything I can help with.

datapythonista

Looks much better now. Added some comments, but I think this new version adds much more value for users.

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:26:29Z

pandas/core/ops.py

@@ -436,27 +436,33 @@ def _get_op_name(op, special):
    'eq': {'op': '==',
           'desc': 'Equal to',
           'reverse': None,
-           'df_examples': None},
+           'df_examples': None,
+           'others': None},


If we don't use reverse, df_examples and others, can we get rid of them instead of having all them to None?

df_examples was kept from original docs and not removed for code consistency if used elsewhere. Can remove and test docstrings.

reverse is needed for compatibility with arithmetic operators as they are included in same dictionary, _op_descriptions

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:29:11Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+_flex_comp_doc_FRAME = """
+Flexible wrappers to comparison operators (`eq`, `ne`, `le`, `lt`, `ge`, `gt`).
+
+Equivalent to `==`, `=!`, `<=`, `<`, `>=`, `>` with support to choose


I'm a bit confused... In the previous dictionaries, you define op, desc... and you also have name which is the key. Shouldn't we use them here? So, we explain in each page the documented method and not all them?

To be consistent with examples that run through several of these sibling methods, the intro lists all of them. It seems counterintuitive to have an intro that describes one method with examples from several methods.

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:30:33Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+
+Parameters
+----------
+other : constant, list, tuple, ndarray, Series, or DataFrame


I think scalar is preferred over constant. For list, tuple and ndarray I think you can abbreviate them as sequence.

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:31:06Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+axis : int or str, optional
+    Axis to target. Can be either the axis name ('index', 'rows',
+    'columns') or number (0, 1).
+level : int or name


Better to use object than name, as in this line we document the type.

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:31:43Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+
+Returns
+-------
+result : DataFrame of bool


We don't need result here, you can just leave the type DataFrame of bool

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:32:03Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+result : DataFrame of bool
+    Result of the comparison.
+
+See also


I think the A should be upper case

I see no current docs page that has Also as title case.

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:36:03Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+   B   300      175
+   C   220      225
+
+Compare to a constant and operator version


Could you explain that both are equivalent in this case? And may be finish the sentence with a period?

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:40:25Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+0       A      300
+1       B      250
+2       C      100
+3       D      150


Instead if defining all the DataFrames first, I'd define the first, show the examples that don't need the others, and define the others immediately before they are used.

For the naming, I'd name df the first, other the second used to be compared. And something like df_multiindex the last one. I think that will make things easier for the users.

I also think that would make things easier for the user having smaller DataFrames (like 2x2). These big True/False DataFrame results are not immediate to understand.

Understood on names. As for lengths, df1 and df2 have different number of rows and columns to show results of across different lengths. And it is just one more row and one more column. Surely not that big. I can add a note to mention results of different lengths.

datapythonista · 2018-08-06T10:41:27Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+0     True  True    False
+1     True  True    False
+2     True  True    False
+>>> df1.ne([100, 250, 300], axis=0)


I prefer index and columns for the axis values, it's more explicit and less confusing.

datapythonista

Looking good, I think there are few things in the examples that can be more clear, but it's looking great.

datapythonista · 2018-08-13T09:47:09Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+    Any single or multiple element data structure, or list-like object.
+axis : int or str, optional
+    Axis to target. Can be either the axis name ('index', 'rows',
+    'columns') or number (0, 1).


To be consistent, I'd document the axis as we usually do. See this docstring: https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/generated/pandas.DataFrame.drop.html

pandas/core/ops.py

datapythonista · 2018-08-13T09:50:30Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+   company  revenue
+0    False    False
+1    False    False
+2    False     True


It's not obvious to me what we're showing here.

datapythonista · 2018-08-13T09:51:58Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+0    False  False    False
+1    False  False    False
+2    False  False     True
+3    False  False    False


I'd use axis='index' and columns instead of 0 and 1. Or may be even better add in the text explaining the example that the parameter axis is not used when comparing two DataFrame objects.

datapythonista · 2018-08-13T09:53:35Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+company
+A        True     True
+B        True     True
+C        True     True


I think here we're comparing two DataFrame objects. This is more useful to show how .loc works with a multiindex than how operators behave. I'd get rid of it.

datapythonista · 2018-08-13T09:55:38Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+   B   True    False
+   C   True    False
+"""
+


I think we need to explain what's going on here. And I'd probably set company as the index when creating the DataFrame, to avoid adding extra complexity here. I don't think it's a problem for other examples.

The blank line after the docstring is not required.

Has this been resolved?

Can you also add this explanation? So users can understand in an easier way what we are showing here.

datapythonista

Looks great. Just few last comments, mainly of failing examples. Please run the validation script to make sure the examples work, after you make these last changes. Cheers!

pandas/core/ops.py

datapythonista · 2018-08-16T08:13:22Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+'columns' return same results.
+
+>>> other = pd.DataFrame({{'revenue': [300, 250, 100, 150]}},
+...                       index = ['A', 'B', 'C', 'D'])


same as before

Usually we would use index= instead of index = . Is that different here?

@ParfaitG can you fix the index = [...] spaces (in all the cases). I think it's the only missing thing to merge this.

pandas/core/ops.py

ParfaitG · 2018-08-18T20:34:06Z

@datapythonista ... Did you get my note above regarding the need for double curly braces? The entire docstring is being run with str.format() and we need to escape the actuals from format's placeholders. Please advise.

datapythonista · 2018-09-30T00:03:29Z

@ParfaitG I see that the doctest that fails in ops.py is just because of quotes:

Expected:
    {"reversed": True, "truediv": True}
Got:
    {'reversed': True, 'truediv': True}

Being such a small change, if you want to change it in this PR, instead of skipping the _gen_eval_kwargs test, that would also be good.

datapythonista · 2018-10-13T07:53:36Z

@ParfaitG can you please take care of the conflicts. Merging after that, and when it's all green. Sorry about the delay.

datapythonista · 2018-10-13T16:12:42Z

thanks for the update @ParfaitG

@jbrockmendel I think you reviewed this before. Do you mind taking another look and merge it if you're happy?

jbrockmendel · 2018-10-13T16:43:29Z

pandas/core/ops.py

+
+>>> df_multindex = pd.DataFrame({{'cost': [250, 150, 100, 150, 300, 220],
+...                              'revenue': [100, 250, 300, 200, 175, 225]}},
+...                              index = [['Q1', 'Q1', 'Q1', 'Q2', 'Q2', 'Q2'],


jbrockmendel · 2018-10-13T16:44:44Z

@datapythonista a handful of questions checking that your comments have been resolved. If those are all OK, then LGTM.

datapythonista · 2018-10-13T18:18:56Z

You're right, didn't see those index = [...].

@ParfaitG I think you should be able to catch those with flake8 --doctests pandas/core/ops.py

ParfaitG · 2018-10-14T15:34:57Z

@datapythonista Your suggested flake 8 call raised no error. What is the issue with index? Do we need to remove space before and after equals sign, =?

datapythonista · 2018-10-14T15:45:43Z

In PEP-8, this is the valid syntax:

some_variable = some_value
some_callable(some_param=the_provided_value)

So yes, the spaces around the = are wrong, as it's not a variable assignment, but setting a parameter value.

The call to flake8 should work if made in a pandas environment with all the dependencies, and run in the root project directory. If after some research on the error you don't see the problem, share the error here to see if we can help.

ParfaitG · 2018-10-14T16:36:48Z

Hmmm...the call flake8 --doctests pandas/core/ops.py returns nothing: no error or line number. To be sure I removed then recreated and activated a new anaconda pandas dev environment and installed dependendies using the Python Sprint Pandas setup document. Then I retried flake8 at the pandas project root with same result as before of no result or error. This suggests no issue with the ops.py document.

Aside, with every docstirng change I run git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff which will return line numbers of issues to be resolved and if no issue nothing is raised (like the above and I reran this line too with nothing raised). I run this line according to the Python Sprint Submitting Changes document. Do note: this document does not include a flake8 --doctests call. I even ran git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --doctests pandas/core/ops.py with same result of no error or line number result.

Please advise how to find these PEP-8 syntax issues. Otherwise, I can manually check and hope they pass on your end.

datapythonista · 2018-10-14T18:51:15Z

Sorry, you're right, seems like flake8 --doctests is not working. Not sure why, and I would say that I've seen it working, but I'm not even sure. May be it never reported any error and I thought everything was all right.

I created #23154, that is anyway the way I think we should validate it. For now, if you can fix the reported errors, and check manually that nothing else is pep-8 invalid, that would be great.

ParfaitG · 2018-10-15T00:02:23Z

Understood. I am noticing some items outside of comparison and arithmetic docstrings that do not adhere to PEP 8 such as the recurring assignment to lambda expressions. According to PEP 8 - Style Guide:

Always use a def statement instead of an assignment statement that binds a lambda expression directly to an identifier

Unfortunately, it is not easy to switch as some lambda calls are inside if statements where def calls are not recommended. I began refactoring code but this may be substantial changes that require discussion and outside of scope for this PR. So I did not commit these changes. One example includes:

    if special:
        dunderize = lambda x: '__{name}__'.format(name=x.strip('_'))
    else:
        dunderize = lambda x: x
    new_methods = {dunderize(k): v for k, v in new_methods.items()}

To be replaced as:

    def dunderize(x):
        if special:
            return '__{name}__'.format(name=x.strip('_'))
        else:
            return x

    new_methods = {dunderize(k): v for k, v in new_methods.items()}

datapythonista · 2018-10-15T16:52:30Z

if you check setup.cfg you'll see that the lambda thing is one of the few pep8 errors that we ignore.

WillAyd · 2018-11-24T02:19:31Z

@ParfaitG can you merge master?

datapythonista · 2018-12-02T00:32:31Z

@ParfaitG can you merge master and make sure the CI is green, so we can merge.

@jbrockmendel can you take another look and see if you're happy to merge this?

jbrockmendel · 2018-12-02T23:17:02Z

pandas/core/ops.py


 Examples
 --------
-{df_examples}
+>>> df = pd.DataFrame({{'angles': [0, 3, 4],
+...                    'degrees': [360, 180, 360]}},


one more space here?

nope, my mistake

jbrockmendel · 2018-12-02T23:18:54Z

LGTM

datapythonista · 2018-12-02T23:20:38Z

Thanks @ParfaitG, and sorry it took so long to get this merged.

And thanks @jbrockmendel for the review.

ParfaitG added 6 commits March 11, 2018 11:25

DOC: Add examples for DataFrame.gt() and DataFrame.ge()

acab08e

Merge branch 'master' of github.com:pandas-dev/pandas into docstring_gt

1818aeb

Updated latest ops.py

86cfd56

Merge branch 'master' of github.com:pandas-dev/pandas into docstring_gt

b68b61f

pandas doc ops.py update for Comparison Methods df examples

DOC: Add examples to docstring of DataFrame.ge() and .gt()

13fed5f

DOC: Add examples to docstring of DataFrame.ge() and .gt()

8bdbc14

jbrockmendel requested changes Jul 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

jbrockmendel reviewed Jul 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

DOC: Update ops.py to add docstring, parameters, and examples to comp…

4668c5f

…arison operators

DOC: Update ops.py for operator methods - cleaning up whitespace

e6eb9b9

datapythonista reviewed Jul 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

jbrockmendel added the Docs label Jul 25, 2018

DOC: Update ops.py to extend docstrings for comparison methods

db143c4

DOC: Create single, generalized docstring for comparison methods

33ff1e4

datapythonista requested changes Aug 6, 2018

View reviewed changes

DOC: Examples and summary updates to comparison operators

e138d92

datapythonista reviewed Aug 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

ParfaitG added 2 commits August 15, 2018 20:01

DOC: further update to parameters and examples for comparison methods

50e9d98

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into docstring_gt

aa016fd

datapythonista requested changes Aug 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

DOC: Adjusted notes and examples for comparison methods

c2cc037

datapythonista reviewed Aug 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

pandas/core/ops.py Show resolved Hide resolved

Updated _gen_eval_kwargs docstring in ops.py to avoid pytest skip

ec71a04

datapythonista mentioned this pull request Oct 13, 2018

DOC: Added series example variable to flex_doc #23117

Closed

Resolve doctest conflict and get latest upstream changes

25129ff

jbrockmendel reviewed Oct 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

Update docstrings to conform to PEP 8 syntax

d344688

Slight indentation fixes

eaaee0d

jreback removed this from the 0.24.0 milestone Nov 6, 2018

DOC: merge with master, resolved conflicts

e777e87

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into docstring_gt

6879e89

jbrockmendel reviewed Dec 2, 2018

View reviewed changes

jbrockmendel approved these changes Dec 2, 2018

View reviewed changes

datapythonista merged commit 9b58f4d into pandas-dev:master Dec 2, 2018

ParfaitG deleted the docstring_gt branch December 3, 2018 02:43

Pingviinituutti pushed a commit to Pingviinituutti/pandas that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2019

DOC: Updating operators docstrings (pandas-dev#20415)

aba76b2

Pingviinituutti pushed a commit to Pingviinituutti/pandas that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2019

DOC: Updating operators docstrings (pandas-dev#20415)

9b22943

+A      300
+B      250
+C      100
+D      150

DOC: Updating operators docstrings #20415

DOC: Updating operators docstrings #20415

Conversation

ParfaitG commented Mar 20, 2018

codecov bot commented Mar 20, 2018 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

jbrockmendel commented Jul 16, 2018

jbrockmendel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbrockmendel commented Jul 21, 2018

datapythonista commented Jul 21, 2018

pep8speaks commented Jul 22, 2018 • edited Loading

Comment last updated on September 27, 2018 at 23:44 Hours UTC

ParfaitG commented Jul 22, 2018

datapythonista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ParfaitG Jul 22, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

datapythonista commented Jul 30, 2018

datapythonista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

datapythonista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

datapythonista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov bot commented Mar 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

pep8speaks commented Jul 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

ParfaitG Jul 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading