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

fix(python): Add missing join strategy. #17938

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

haim0n
Copy link

@haim0n haim0n commented Jul 30, 2024

No description provided.

@haim0n haim0n changed the title docs(python): Add missing join strategy. fix(python): Add missing join strategy. Jul 30, 2024
@ritchie46
Copy link
Member

Thanks! Do we need to add that at the LazyFrame docstring as well?

@haim0n
Copy link
Author

haim0n commented Jul 30, 2024

Thanks! Do we need to add that at the LazyFrame docstring as well?

Yeah, sorry for missing it. I'll add + I think that 'outer' is just an alias for full . WDYT ?

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 30, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 80.34%. Comparing base (82b6388) to head (1ddad48).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17938      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.35%   80.34%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1492     1492              
  Lines      196330   196330              
  Branches     2813     2813              
==========================================
- Hits       157764   157748      -16     
- Misses      38045    38061      +16     
  Partials      521      521              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@alexander-beedie
Copy link
Collaborator

alexander-beedie commented Jul 30, 2024

We have actively deprecated1 "outer" (as "left", "right" and "full" are all types of outer join 😉).

I don't think we should be putting it back in, as "full" is the correct strategy name.

Footnotes

  1. https://github.com/pola-rs/polars/pull/16417

@ritchie46
Copy link
Member

Yes, you're right. I missed it. :D

I think we can close htis.

@ritchie46 ritchie46 closed this Jul 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants