-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
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
feat(python,rust): add drop_first parameter for to_dummies (issue #8246) #9143
Conversation
You might need to rename the issue as |
Hi @EdmundsEcho! Thanks for the contribution; I've addressed the lint errors, added some test coverage and made a small fix - if you'd like to get this into our next release, I can push these updates onto your branch (here) so we can finish it off? (Though I think you'd have to allow me to do so: see the "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox) ;) |
+1 on getting this to the next release, a very helpful argument to have! |
@alexander-beedie I had to invite you to be a writing collaborator to the project. This is a bug with github hosted under an organization (Lucivia). Let me know if you can't make the push happen. I'll see what I can do to integrate the changes. |
Great, thanks! Think this should have got it... let's see how the tests go ;) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good. Thanks everybody.
(Closes #8246).
The fix add the "drop_first" parameter to the
to_dummies
function. See issue #8246: "to_dummies implementation may be incorrect". The changes were made in-line with py/pandas. The parameter is abool
with a default valuefalse
. The default value isFalse
; consistent with py/pandas.I updated the current tests where applicable by including the additional parameter set to
false
. I did not create new tests with the parameter set totrue
(orTrue
in py).However, I did test the changes in the rust code on my local machine. The reason for not adding a new test was only because several unrelated tests were not passing And I was not familiar with the testing structure.