Skip to content

BUG: Timestamp+int should raise NullFrequencyError, not ValueError #28268

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Sep 8, 2019
Merged

BUG: Timestamp+int should raise NullFrequencyError, not ValueError #28268

merged 13 commits into from
Sep 8, 2019

Conversation

@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member

@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel commented Sep 3, 2019

Last prerequisite before we can fix #28080.
@TomAugspurger
Copy link
Contributor

TomAugspurger commented Sep 3, 2019

What would a release note for this look like? IIUC, this is backwards compatible since catching a ValueError will still catch this NullFrequencyError? But we should still have a note describing the change so that users could tighten up the caught exception if they desire.
@TomAugspurger TomAugspurger added this to the 1.0 milestone Sep 3, 2019
@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

jbrockmendel commented Sep 3, 2019

What would a release note for this look like?

This is a good question. I'm hesitant to advertise the change because before long we'll be enforcing the deprecation, at which point this should raise TypeError.
@WillAyd
Copy link
Member

WillAyd commented Sep 3, 2019

I think OK to just say something like ... now raises a NullFrequencyError without worrying too much about the details of a future deprecation
jreback
jreback requested changes Sep 4, 2019
View reviewed changes
doc/source/whatsnew/v0.25.2.rst Outdated
Datetimelike
^^^^^^^^^^^^

- Addition and subtraction of integer or integer-dtype arrays with :class:`Timestamp` will now raise ``NullFrequencyError`` instead of ``ValueError`` (:issue:`28268`)
Copy link
Contributor

@jreback jreback Sep 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

move to 1.0
Copy link
Member Author

@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel Sep 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

changed+green
@jreback jreback added Bug Frequency DateOffsets labels Sep 4, 2019
@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel mentioned this pull request Sep 6, 2019
Merged
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Sep 7, 2019

lgtm. maybe rebase and push again (as the CI is hanging)
@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

jbrockmendel commented Sep 7, 2019

rebased+green
@WillAyd
Copy link
Member

WillAyd commented Sep 7, 2019

Looks like some merge conflicts - can you fix up and repush?
@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

jbrockmendel commented Sep 7, 2019

rebased+green
@jreback jreback merged commit 5c57e7b into pandas-dev:master Sep 8, 2019
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Sep 8, 2019

thanks @jbrockmendel
@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel deleted the nfe branch September 8, 2019 17:12
proost pushed a commit to proost/pandas that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2019
@jbrockmendel @proost
BUG: Timestamp+int should raise NullFrequencyError, not ValueError (p…
32d349c 
…andas-dev#28268)
proost pushed a commit to proost/pandas that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2019
@jbrockmendel @proost
BUG: Timestamp+int should raise NullFrequencyError, not ValueError (p…
7183ae9 
…andas-dev#28268)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Bug Frequency DateOffsets

4 participants

@jbrockmendel @TomAugspurger @WillAyd @jreback