Open galipremsagar opened 3 years ago
Does the need for this lead to any confusing name collisions with BaseIndex
that would necessitate renaming that class?
They would be staying in different modules
, but seems this could introduce some kind of confusion with so similarly named classes :(
BaseIndex
to its own internal submodule _base_index.py
, so we could also consider just making it a private class if we need to. Renaming might be a better option though since we now advise people to subclass BaseIndex
rather than Index
if subclassing is really necessary. I don't think it's a major issue, just something to consider.This issue has been labeled inactive-30d
due to no recent activity in the past 30 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed. This issue will be labeled inactive-90d
if there is no activity in the next 60 days.
This issue has been labeled inactive-90d
due to no recent activity in the past 90 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. For context: https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/pull/9085#discussion_r695093462 We will have to provide a class equivalent to
BaseIndexer
incudf
, we currently use the pandasBaseIndexer
in our code.Note : As part of this FEA, we will have to add a dispatch mechanism in
dask
& probably figure out how to dispatch correctly indask-sql