You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I think there is consensus (correct me if I'm wrong), on having a 2-D structure where (at least) columns are labelled, and where a whole column share a type. More specific discussions about this structure can be made in #2.
In this issue, I'd like to discuss how we should name the class representing this structure. We've been using dataframe for the concept so far, and it's how the class is named in pandas, vaex, Modin, R and others. But in #14 (comment) it was proposed that we consider other names. I list here the proposed options in the comment and couple more. I propose that people write their username next to their preferred option, and use the comments to expand on why if needed.
Also, I think we should decide about capitalization, I guess these are the only options (using dataframe as example, but applied to the preferred option from the above list):
I personally think that in Python there is some consistency in using lowercase capitalization for types and data structures: int, str, list, datetime, dict, tuple, array,... and it feels like dataframe belongs to that group, more than a general class.
But if @devin-petersohn is ok with DataFrame, and there are no more opinions, I'll open a PR in the RFC for DataFrame (since it's the one being used so far).
I am only okay with DataFrame if Array (capitalization) is how we are spelling the array protocol. As long as we are consistent between the two, I am okay.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 4:01 PM Devin Petersohn ***@***.***> wrote:
I am only okay with DataFrame if Array (capitalization) is how we are
spelling the array protocol. As long as we are consistent between the two,
I am okay.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#17 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAKAOIX4Z62EAHYWX2DEYF3RYO3J5ANCNFSM4OFQR62Q>
.
+1 to matching what the array / Array API standard does.
we didn't specify a name there - there's just "an array object". Reason: not needed (there's no way to call <array>.__init__), and existing libraries will not rename their existing array, Array, NDArray, Tensor` objects anyway.
Activity
datapythonista commentedon Jun 25, 2020
I personally think that in Python there is some consistency in using lowercase capitalization for types and data structures:
int,str,list,datetime,dict,tuple,array,... and it feels likedataframebelongs to that group, more than a general class.But if @devin-petersohn is ok with
DataFrame, and there are no more opinions, I'll open a PR in the RFC forDataFrame(since it's the one being used so far).devin-petersohn commentedon Jun 25, 2020
I am only okay with
DataFrameifArray(capitalization) is how we are spelling the array protocol. As long as we are consistent between the two, I am okay.TomAugspurger commentedon Jun 25, 2020
rgommers commentedon Jun 25, 2021
we didn't specify a name there - there's just "an array object". Reason: not needed (there's no way to call
<array>.__init__), and existing libraries will not rename their existingarray, Array,NDArray,Tensor` objects anyway.Status quo is
DataFrame.