CLN: drop internals._invert_reordering in favour of lib.get_reverse_indexer #6988
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
|
Speaking of missing changelog entry, I'm not sure about how do I mention an internal class in Enhancements section... |
|
see the release notes / whatsnew for 0.13.0 when I refactored series. But don't think you need a whole section, just a line or two referring to the issue (and a warning/note to inform the user in v0.14.0 that hey did some refactoring internally, nothing in the API changed...bu wanted to let u know) |
|
looks fine, ping when ready |
|
Bumped the changelog. Is this what you had in mind? |
|
yep...that's good |
|
Travis failed with a weird error in io test, apparently, due to github serving |
jreback
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 28, 2014
CLN: drop internals._invert_reordering in favour of lib.get_reverse_indexer
|
no prob...thanks |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I've implemented the former while refactoring BlockManager (#6745) because I didn't find the latter in lib module. This PR will remove the duplication (and also add missing changelog entry).