3 ms·
The problem is not with the Wes' original decision but with the fact that it was never revisited even when pandas took off at much larger scope. Should had been
by lr1970 5y ago
The problem is not with the Wes' original decision but with the fact that it was never revisited even when pandas took off at much larger scope. Should had been fixed before 1.0 release.
- nojito 5y agoThis belief is quite common in the Opensource space. It’s far easier to criticize than it is to submit a pull request.
- kickopotomus 5y agoIt's like there is some strange belief now that software should be "finished" before a 1.0 version now. When did that start?
- anigbrowl 5y agoI'm glad you posted about this because I didn't know, but my reflexive response was 'well guess that won't work for [project idea], guess I'll roll my own or just use the NumPy version.' I personally don't mind the lack of one-size-fits-all. If Pandas were to be part of the Python Standard Library I think you'd have a stronger argument, since the unspoken premise of a SL is that you can leave for a desert island with only that and your IDE and still get things done.