BUG: setting td64 value into numeric Series incorrectly casting to int #39488
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jreback
added
Indexing
Contributor
this is deduplicated? |
Member
Author
haven't updated to de-dup yet, turns out to be a little non-trivial bc this makes some view-or-not assertions the other doesnt |
jreback
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2021
| values = np.where(cond, values, other) | ||
| if isinstance(other, np.timedelta64) and self.dtype == object: | ||
| # https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/12550 | ||
| # timedelta64 will incorrectly cast to int |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
too bad you cannot use np.where then cast back the integers if necessary
Contributor
|
prob should add a whatsnew for this change |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We fixed this a few days ago for some of the setting-methods, but there were a few we missed. Re-using the TestSetitemEquivalents pattern is much more thorough.
We'll be able to de-duplicate the test class following #39477