-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
Add unique_counts()
and fix the description of unique_all()
#317
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
Conversation
hmmm why does this PR only have 1 check instead of 3? |
@leofang Not sure why it has only one check. 🧐 |
My guess is the other two CIs only run for this repo's branches, not for branches from forks. There is a piece of permission bit that needs to be set (at least it's the case for GH actions). |
Ah, right. This was probably intentional in order to avoid drive-by PRs consuming resources. |
unique_counts
and apply a few fixes to unique_*()
functionsunique_counts()
and fix the description of unique_all()
I have reverted all changes on the returned integer type (discussion continued in #319) to make this PR easier to review 🙂 |
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.
LGTM. Thanks, @leofang!
Thanks, @kgryte, good catch! |
Close #291.
This PR:
unique_counts
as suggested in Addunique_counts()
? #291 to return unique values and their corresponding countsunique
APIs:unique_all()
was copied/pasted, which is now properly expandedthe "default integer type" mentions are not accurate if the index/count is too large. Now we allow type promotion as needed.UPDATE: discussion moved to The definition and discussion around "default array index data type" is missing #319.