4 ms·

> yet the API is all over the place Agreed. In particular one might have hoped that 1.0 would fix indexing. .ix (deprecated), .loc, .iloc and "[" is an exampl

> yet the API is all over the place Agreed. In particular one might have hoped that 1.0 would fix indexing. .ix (deprecated), .loc, .iloc and "[" is an example of what people mean by saying the API is (a) a mess and (b) "deeply unpythonic". Shouldn't "[" be removed entirely if .loc and .iloc are recommended, given the odd and unpredictable edge cases with "["? > unless you use it regularly for a long period of time, it is almost impossible to get fluent with it. Agreed. I know a huge amount of valiant, voluntary, open source work has gone into it, but it is a shame that the primary data-frame library in the Python ecosystem lacks a clean, pythonic API. Having been negative I don't want to obscure the fact that it does have some great and powerful code behind its API.

mint2 7y ago
Definitely agree the API can be tightened up, but just for fun and perspective take a look at pre pandas data wrangling tools like sas. Like Example x3 vs x5 in their docs on the sum function: http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/lrdict/64316/HTML/default/viewer.htm#a000245953.htm http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/lrdict/64316/HTM...
- antipaul 7y ago
  <shudder>
milliams 7y ago
That's almost exactly what they've started to do in 1.0. You say .ix is deprecated but in fact it was removed in 1.0. Now that 1.0 is out, they have a deprecation policy which will allow them to remove things like this. Pandas' API might be a mess but that's partly because they're been really good about experimenting with the best way to do things for the last 10 (?) years. Adding newer alternatives to fiddly APIs etc. but never removing them. Now they can start the removals.