Adding DF upsample #163
Adding DF upsample #163
Conversation
Co-authored-by: universalmind303 <[email protected]>
Simplifying test Fixing documentation
| * ... }) | ||
| * > df.drop(['ham', 'apple']) | ||
| * ... }); | ||
| * > console.log(df.drop(['ham', 'apple']).toString()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you shouldn't need toString() here. the node.util.inspect already properly displays the dataframe in console.log
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but It does not work in Bun b/c I get ProxyObject without .toString():
ProxyObject {
foo: shape: (3,)
Series: 'foo' [f64]
[
1.0
2.0
3.0
],
bar: shape: (3,)
Series: 'bar' [f64]
[
6.0
7.0
8.0
],
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if that's the case, that'd be a bug in bun. The toString should be unnecessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I pinged Jarred about this issue. Thx
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure if it's a bun issues, b/c this works fine in bun:
console.log(
pl.DataFrame([{ a: 1, b: 2,}])[Symbol.for("nodejs.util.inspect.custom")]()
);
It results in:
shape: (1, 2)
┌─────┬─────┐
│ a ┆ b │
│ --- ┆ --- │
│ f64 ┆ f64 │
╞═════╪═════╡
│ 1.0 ┆ 2.0 │
└─────┴─────┘
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah this is definitely an issue with bun. If they claim to be 100% interopable with node.js, then the outputs should be the same. I'd suggest opening an issue with them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Node and Bun output for this line is the same:
console.log(
pl.DataFrame([{ a: 1, b: 2,}])[Symbol.for("nodejs.util.inspect.custom")]()
);
You had an issue open with Bun but closed it. Any reason?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes the symbol works as expected, but console.logging without it does not.
console.log(pl.DataFrame({a: [1]}))this should be identical in both. If it's not, then that is a bug in bun.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hopping that this PR from the Bun team will fix it.
Adding DF upsample to close #162