Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add inner/left/right/outer/semi/anti/cross-join #2101

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Feb 15, 2020

Conversation

bkamins
Copy link
Member

@bkamins bkamins commented Feb 6, 2020

Fixes #2092

@bkamins
Copy link
Member Author

bkamins commented Feb 6, 2020

CI failed due to an unrelated error (failure to clone Git repo), so this should be good to review. Thank you!

Copy link
Member

@quinnj quinnj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a large diff, but I really like the changes. Thanks for tackling this and being so precise.

@bkamins
Copy link
Member Author

bkamins commented Feb 10, 2020

@nalimilan - if you will not have any comments on this I will review it again and want to merge it in a few days. Thank you!

bkamins and others added 2 commits February 11, 2020 11:47
Co-Authored-By: Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@club.fr>
Co-Authored-By: Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@club.fr>
@bkamins
Copy link
Member Author

bkamins commented Feb 11, 2020

Thank you for the comments. Apart from the suggested changes I have improved the description of validate keyword argument for the case when more than two data frames are joined.

@bkamins
Copy link
Member Author

bkamins commented Feb 11, 2020

CI went down due to large deprecation of join in deprecated.jl.

Inner join two or more data frame objects and return a `DataFrame` containing
the result.
Perform an inner join two or more data frame objects and return a `DataFrame` containing
the result. Only include rows with keys that match in all passed data frames.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Written like this, it's not obvious that it's the definition an inner join. Maybe say "An inner join includes..." Same for other kinds.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok - all suggestions applied

@bkamins bkamins added the breaking The proposed change is breaking. label Feb 12, 2020
@bkamins bkamins added this to the 1.0 milestone Feb 12, 2020
bkamins and others added 4 commits February 12, 2020 14:00
Co-Authored-By: Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@club.fr>
Co-Authored-By: Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@club.fr>
Co-Authored-By: Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@club.fr>
Copy link
Member

@nalimilan nalimilan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks. Looks good with the small suggestions.

Co-Authored-By: Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@club.fr>
@bkamins
Copy link
Member Author

bkamins commented Feb 13, 2020

Thank you for working on this. I applied the changes.

@bkamins bkamins merged commit d6cbdc4 into JuliaData:master Feb 15, 2020
@bkamins bkamins deleted the refactor_join branch February 15, 2020 21:57
tomyun added a commit to cropbox/Cropbox.jl that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2020
tomyun added a commit to cropbox/Cropbox.jl that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
breaking The proposed change is breaking.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Reconsider overloading Base.join?
3 participants