While reviewing: #20198, I notices this was defined in the DatetimeProperties itself:
classDatetimeProperties(Properties):
"""
Accessor object for datetimelike properties of the Series values.
Examples
--------
>>> s.dt.hour
>>> s.dt.second
>>> s.dt.quarter
Returns a Series indexed like the original Series.
Raises TypeError if the Series does not contain datetimelike values.
"""
defto_pydatetime(self):
returnself._get_values().to_pydatetime()
@property
deffreq(self):
returnself._get_values().inferred_freq
DatetimeProperties._add_delegate_accessors(
delegate=DatetimeIndex,
accessors=DatetimeIndex._datetimelike_ops,
typ='property')
DatetimeProperties._add_delegate_accessors(
delegate=DatetimeIndex,
accessors=DatetimeIndex._datetimelike_methods,
typ='method')
Is there any reason that we have it like that, while all others are just wrapped DatetimeIndex attributes/methods?
Because that means this returns (a bit strangly) an ndarray instead of a Series of the datetime.datetime values (making it inconsistent with other methods)
Ah, now I opened this issue, I thought of a probable reason: because otherwise the datetime.datetime values would quickly get inferred / coerced back to datetime64 ?
While reviewing: #20198, I notices this was defined in the
DatetimeProperties
itself:Is there any reason that we have it like that, while all others are just wrapped DatetimeIndex attributes/methods?
Because that means this returns (a bit strangly) an ndarray instead of a Series of the datetime.datetime values (making it inconsistent with other methods)
cc @jbrockmendel @jreback
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: