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

DOC: Improve "inplace" param in Dataframe.rename() docs #24037

Closed

Conversation

nmusolino
Copy link
Contributor

@nmusolino nmusolino commented Dec 1, 2018

@pep8speaks
Copy link

Hello @nmusolino! Thanks for submitting the PR.

@nmusolino
Copy link
Contributor Author

nmusolino commented Dec 1, 2018

As described in #23076, the description of "inplace" in the current documentation is "backwards".

Arguably, there should be a wider cleanup to use a consistent phrasing for inplace across pandas, but the scope of this PR is just fixing the "backwards" parameter documentation in this method.

Here is some prior art for how "inplace" is documented in DataFrame methods with a similar purpose:

DataFrame.drop()

    inplace : bool, default False
        If True, do operation inplace and return None.

DataFrame.reset_index()

    inplace : boolean, default False
        Modify the DataFrame in place (do not create a new object)

DataFrame.rename_axis(). This is probably from a shared NDFrame docstring.

    inplace : boolean, default False
         Modifies the object directly, instead of creating a new Series or DataFrame.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #24037 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #24037   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   42.46%   42.46%           
=======================================
  Files         161      161           
  Lines       51557    51557           
=======================================
  Hits        21892    21892           
  Misses      29665    29665
Flag Coverage Δ
#single 42.46% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandas/core/frame.py 38.7% <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 5b0610b...f273ef0. Read the comment docs.

1 similar comment
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #24037 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #24037   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   42.46%   42.46%           
=======================================
  Files         161      161           
  Lines       51557    51557           
=======================================
  Hits        21892    21892           
  Misses      29665    29665
Flag Coverage Δ
#single 42.46% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandas/core/frame.py 38.7% <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 5b0610b...f273ef0. Read the comment docs.

@gfyoung gfyoung added Docs DataFrame DataFrame data structure labels Dec 2, 2018
@gfyoung
Copy link
Member

gfyoung commented Dec 2, 2018

Arguably, there should be a wider cleanup to use a consistent phrasing for inplace across pandas

That sounds like a plan. Maybe we could do it in this PR even.

@nmusolino
Copy link
Contributor Author

nmusolino commented Dec 2, 2018

I'm willing to work on that in a future PR. My suggestion is to get this PR in right now, in order to fix the mistaken docstring and close the associated issue (#23076).

The problem with the current DataFrame.rename() docstring, just to be explicit, is this: in general, when a parameter <X> has a description "whether to <blank>", the implication is that when the parameter X is true, the method will "<blank>".

The current docstring does not follow that convention, and in fact inverts that convention.

As for the wider change, I think that will take more discussion:

  1. How should the parameter description be phrased?
  2. Should the "Returns" section of each method include a note about returning None when inplace is True (where applicable)?
  3. Should the parameter description mention that internal data structures (e.g. block manager or index) might be copied even when inplace is True?

Or even, should that effort be made in light of #16529: API/DEPR: Deprecate inplace parameter? I just saw that deprecation proposal now.

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Dec 2, 2018

cc @datapythonista

Copy link
Member

@datapythonista datapythonista left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

+1 on standardizing the descriptions for inplace. But the proposed description is no exactly correct.

Whether to return a new DataFrame. If True then value of copy is
ignored.
If True, perform the operation in-place, modifying this DataFrame,
and return None.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think this is technically correct. The name is misleading, but using inplace doesn't necessarily mean that we're modifying the DataFrame, as we can be returning a copy.

I think the previous description is more accurate, except that it sounds like inplace=True will return a new DataFrame.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry, I don't understand your first paragraph. Can you give an example of when an operation with inplace=True doesn't modify "self", i.e. the data frame on which the method is called?

When inplace is True, the method should modify the data frame, and no second frame should be created. When inplace is False, the method should return a second data frame, and self should be unmodified.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If you have a DataFrame named df, using the memory in the address 1000-2000, and you do df.operation(inplace=True), df will be modified, but the data can be now in the memory address 3000-4000.

So, technically speaking, the operation is not in place, as the result has been copied to a different location (even if the reference df is reassigned to the new memory).

That's why I don't like your description, as for a user who doesn't care about the memory is perfectly fine and correct. But if you think about the memory, you description is not really correct.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nmusolino there are about 2 inplace operations that actually operate inplace. all others, simply do an internal copy, do the op, then assign back to the top level data. inplace has never been a real operation in pandas, nor will it ever be. This is why we are deprecating it. You can certainly give a longer explanation, but discouraging usage would be good here.

Copy link
Member

@datapythonista datapythonista Dec 3, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jreback are we ready to deprecate all inplace parameters? A quick grep shows around 60 methods with an inplace parameter, so it's not so much work to start raising warnings (and update the descriptions) for all them.

Or do we prefer to wait?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@datapythonista :

See #16529 - I think we were planning to wait until 1.0, though can always push up.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for pointing out the issue @gfyoung, I'll continue the conversation there.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@nmusolino nmusolino Dec 3, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@datapythonista, @jreback , I understand that these operations may involve copies. I wrote earlier that "internal data structures (e.g. block manager or index) might be copied even when inplace is True."

I think the distinction you are trying to draw is that a rename or fillna operation does not necessarily overwrite individual elements in place; is that right? As a simple example, I seem to recall that Index objects are generally immutable, so any operation that changes the index would necessarily replace the index.

Avoiding that implication is a reasonable point. To be clear, however, the methods are modifying the dataframe.

How about this description?

    inplace : boolean, default False
        If true, rename index labels in this DataFrame and return None, 
        without creating a new DataFrame.

Or a simpler, more generic version:

    inplace : boolean, default False
        If true, modify this DataFrame and return None; does not create a 
        new DataFrame.

@datapythonista
Copy link
Member

Closing in favor of #24063, where the inplace argument will be deprecated, and all descriptions updated.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
DataFrame DataFrame data structure Docs
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Unclear documentation of inplace parameter for pandas.DataFrame.rename.
5 participants