-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.3k
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
BUG: Series.combine() fails with ExtensionArray inside of Series #21183
Changes from 7 commits
7469ca9
bbb6640
339b23a
61a09e7
d862e83
4c925fc
27480ac
f96372e
677fe18
9fceee7
1010cb5
aceea9f
79506ac
0e4720b
2a21117
e08f832
d3ed2c7
4ca28b2
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -2185,18 +2185,33 @@ def _binop(self, other, func, level=None, fill_value=None): | |
|
||
this_vals, other_vals = ops.fill_binop(this.values, other.values, | ||
fill_value) | ||
|
||
with np.errstate(all='ignore'): | ||
result = func(this_vals, other_vals) | ||
name = ops.get_op_result_name(self, other) | ||
|
||
if (is_extension_array_dtype(this_vals) or | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Stepping back a bit here, why does ExtensionArray get a fallback to There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Indeed. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. agree here. I am puzzled why this change at all. If the extension array supports ops this would work as is, if not it would raise a TypeError. So not sure what you are trying to do here. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. My mistake. When I separated out this PR from #20889, I should have put back the old |
||
is_extension_array_dtype(other_vals)): | ||
try: | ||
result = func(this_vals, other_vals) | ||
except TypeError: | ||
result = NotImplemented | ||
|
||
if result is NotImplemented: | ||
result = [func(a, b) for a, b in zip(this_vals, other_vals)] | ||
if is_extension_array_dtype(this_vals): | ||
excons = type(this_vals)._from_sequence | ||
else: | ||
excons = type(other_vals)._from_sequence | ||
result = excons(result) | ||
else: | ||
with np.errstate(all='ignore'): | ||
result = func(this_vals, other_vals) | ||
result = self._constructor(result, index=new_index, name=name) | ||
result = result.__finalize__(self) | ||
if name is None: | ||
# When name is None, __finalize__ overwrites current name | ||
result.name = None | ||
return result | ||
|
||
def combine(self, other, func, fill_value=np.nan): | ||
def combine(self, other, func, fill_value=None): | ||
""" | ||
Perform elementwise binary operation on two Series using given function | ||
with optional fill value when an index is missing from one Series or | ||
|
@@ -2208,6 +2223,9 @@ def combine(self, other, func, fill_value=np.nan): | |
func : function | ||
Function that takes two scalars as inputs and return a scalar | ||
fill_value : scalar value | ||
The default specifies to use np.nan unless self is | ||
backed by ExtensionArray, in which case the ExtensionArray | ||
na_value is used. | ||
|
||
Returns | ||
------- | ||
|
@@ -2227,20 +2245,36 @@ def combine(self, other, func, fill_value=np.nan): | |
Series.combine_first : Combine Series values, choosing the calling | ||
Series's values first | ||
""" | ||
self_is_ext = is_extension_array_dtype(self.values) | ||
if fill_value is None: | ||
if self_is_ext: | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I thikn There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I made that change. |
||
fill_value = self.dtype.na_value | ||
else: | ||
fill_value = np.nan | ||
if isinstance(other, Series): | ||
new_index = self.index.union(other.index) | ||
new_name = ops.get_op_result_name(self, other) | ||
new_values = np.empty(len(new_index), dtype=self.dtype) | ||
for i, idx in enumerate(new_index): | ||
new_values = [] | ||
for idx in new_index: | ||
lv = self.get(idx, fill_value) | ||
rv = other.get(idx, fill_value) | ||
with np.errstate(all='ignore'): | ||
new_values[i] = func(lv, rv) | ||
new_values.append(func(lv, rv)) | ||
else: | ||
new_index = self.index | ||
with np.errstate(all='ignore'): | ||
new_values = func(self._values, other) | ||
if not self_is_ext: | ||
with np.errstate(all='ignore'): | ||
new_values = func(self._values, other) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I also don't really understand (but this is related with the current implementation, not your changes) why we don't do it element-wise here (no loop over the values as is the case if For me, this seems like a bug in the current implementation There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @jorisvandenbossche You're correct. I created a new issue #21248 . I will fix that here. |
||
else: | ||
new_values = [func(lv, other) for lv in self._values] | ||
new_name = self.name | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. can you put a comment on what is going on here There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. done |
||
if self_is_ext and not is_categorical_dtype(self.values): | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I am puzzled by all of these element-by-element operations. Is there a reason you don't simply define There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @jreback There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. sounds good to me There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. pls don't use
why is the try/except here? that is very odd There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I changed the if test as you suggested. @jreback wrote:
The idea is to first try to coerce to the same type as the extension dtype, and if that doesn't work, just call the regular constructor for the Series. |
||
try: | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. so what kind of op hits the type error here? I find this a bit disconcerting that you need to catch a TypeError? is this a case that the combine op returns a result which is not an extension type (e.g. say its an int or someting), is that the reason? if so pls indicate via a comment. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @jreback Here is an example:
Since the function passed to combine is an arbitrary function, it could return a result of any type, which may not be the type that will fit in the EA. I'll add a comment. |
||
new_values = self._values._from_sequence(new_values) | ||
except TypeError: | ||
pass | ||
|
||
return self._constructor(new_values, index=new_index, name=new_name) | ||
|
||
def combine_first(self, other): | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -138,6 +138,22 @@ def test_value_counts(self, all_data, dropna): | |
|
||
tm.assert_series_equal(result, expected) | ||
|
||
def test_combine(self): | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. can you put this in the base class? (and then if needed skip it for the json tests) And make use of the fixtures? (so passing There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That took a bit of work to do, since I need two vectors that are different. Found discussion at pytest-dev/pytest#2703 about how to do it. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. that's clever .. :-) |
||
# GH 20825 | ||
orig_data1 = make_data() | ||
orig_data2 = make_data() | ||
s1 = pd.Series(DecimalArray(orig_data1)) | ||
s2 = pd.Series(DecimalArray(orig_data2)) | ||
result = s1.combine(s2, lambda x1, x2: x1 <= x2) | ||
expected = pd.Series([a <= b for (a, b) in | ||
zip(orig_data1, orig_data2)]) | ||
tm.assert_series_equal(result, expected) | ||
|
||
result = s1.combine(s2, lambda x1, x2: x1 + x2) | ||
expected = pd.Series(DecimalArray([a + b for (a, b) in | ||
zip(orig_data1, orig_data2)])) | ||
tm.assert_series_equal(result, expected) | ||
|
||
|
||
class TestCasting(BaseDecimal, base.BaseCastingTests): | ||
pass | ||
|
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.
be positive. say it works!
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.
fixed