Skip to content

BUG: Should not raise error in concatenating Series with numpy scalar and tuple names (GH21015) #21132

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
May 21, 2018
Merged

BUG: Should not raise error in concatenating Series with numpy scalar and tuple names (GH21015) #21132

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
13f00df
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 19, 2018
354eb2d
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 19, 2018
613ab4e
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 19, 2018
3e84f9c
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 19, 2018
35b664f
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 19, 2018
7ec0135
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 19, 2018
345c084
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 20, 2018
21d834e
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 20, 2018
ba8abba
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 20, 2018
8aa7e05
GH21015
KalyanGokhale May 20, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion doc/source/whatsnew/v0.23.1.txt
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ Plotting
Reshaping
^^^^^^^^^

-
- Bug in :func:`concat` where error was raised in concatenating Series with numpy scalar and tuple names (:issue:`21015`)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

double backticks around Series, is this only a numpy scalar or any scalar?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

only numpy scalar - as it returns an array on comparison with tuple

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok that's fine (but add in an integer in the test as well below)

-

Categorical
Expand Down
5 changes: 4 additions & 1 deletion pandas/core/common.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -55,7 +55,10 @@ def flatten(l):
def _consensus_name_attr(objs):
name = objs[0].name
for obj in objs[1:]:
if obj.name != name:
try:
if obj.name != name:
return None
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do like

try:
    if obj.name != name:
        name = None
 except ValueError:
    name = None

return name

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jreback Thanks - will make the changes

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done

except ValueError:
return None
return name

Expand Down
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions pandas/tests/reshape/test_concat.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2350,6 +2350,21 @@ def test_concat_datetime_timezone(self):

tm.assert_frame_equal(result, expected)

def test_concat_series_name_npscalar_tuple(self):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this doesn't need to be in the class, it can just be a module level test (e.g. de-dent)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

parameterize this on a np.int64 and an int

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done - took the test out of class, parameterised as suggested, also actually removed the test case which took a row from DataFrame

# GH21015
s1 = pd.Series({'a': 1.5}, name=np.int64(190))
s2 = pd.Series([], name=(43, 0))
result = pd.concat([s1, s2])
expected = pd.Series({'a': 1.5})
tm.assert_series_equal(result, expected)

df1 = pd.DataFrame([[1, 2], [3, 4]], columns=['a', 'b'], index=[0, 1])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is very weird to construct a DataFrame to then take a row from it. Just directly construct the series.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

will update - had added the original test case from the issue #21015

df2 = pd.DataFrame([[5, 6], [7, 8]], columns=['c', 'd'],
index=pd.MultiIndex.from_tuples([(0, 0), (1, 1)]))
result = pd.concat([df1.iloc[0], df2.iloc[0]])
expected = pd.Series({'a': 1, 'b': 2, 'c': 5, 'd': 6})
tm.assert_series_equal(result, expected)


@pytest.mark.parametrize('pdt', [pd.Series, pd.DataFrame, pd.Panel])
@pytest.mark.parametrize('dt', np.sctypes['float'])
Expand Down