Skip to content

Conversation

ghost
Copy link

@ghost ghost commented Apr 3, 2013

#3251

before

pd.options.display.max_seq_items= 5
print pd.core.common.pprint_thing(dict(foo=range(100)))
foo = range(5)
foo[0] = foo
print pd.core.common.pprint_thing(dict(foo=foo))
{'foo': [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99]}
{'foo': [[...], 1, 2, 3, 4]}

After:

In [16]: pd.options.display.max_seq_items= 5
    ...: pd.core.common.pprint_thing(dict(foo=range(100)))
    ...: 
Out[16]: u'{foo: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ...]}'

In [17]: foo = range(5)
    ...: foo[0] = foo
    ...: pd.core.common.pprint_thing(dict(foo=foo))
    ...: 
Out[17]: u'{foo: [[[[...], 1, 2, 3, 4], 1, 2, 3, 4], 1, 2, 3, 4]}'

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Apr 3, 2013

moved to 0.12 to be merge right along with #3038, to minimize possible test
breakage for users due to a formatting flicker between merging this (change)
and that (change back, in another way).

ghost pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 23, 2013
BUG: pprint_thing should pprint and limit nested sequences in dicts GH3251
@ghost ghost merged commit 3396dca into pandas-dev:master Apr 23, 2013
@ghost ghost deleted the GH3251A branch April 23, 2013 02:12
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Apr 23, 2013

preemptive merger !

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Apr 23, 2013

hey what now?

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Apr 23, 2013

Jeff humor :)

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Apr 23, 2013

I'm trying to drag all y'all to a sane "merge window" type workflow,
and f** A if i'm not gonna lead by example.

I guess you meant to call me "mergerer!", what a fun word to pronounce, rhymes well too.

Great work on 0.11 Jeff!

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Apr 23, 2013

U2 @y-p

This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant