Skip to content

Pandas 3 support#568

Open
freemansw1 wants to merge 11 commits intotobac-project:RC_v1.6.xfrom
freemansw1:pandas3_support
Open

Pandas 3 support#568
freemansw1 wants to merge 11 commits intotobac-project:RC_v1.6.xfrom
freemansw1:pandas3_support

Conversation

@freemansw1
Copy link
Member

@freemansw1 freemansw1 commented Mar 11, 2026

Resolves #561 and adds support for Pandas 3.

With #567 unanswered, I've taken a "middle-ground" approach with datetimes. In several places in the datetime tests, I added us as a valid output. For the matching function, I've updated it to try to force precisions to match.

When you review, please regress changes with and vs Pandas 2.

  • Have you followed our guidelines in CONTRIBUTING.md?
  • Have you self-reviewed your code and corrected any misspellings?
  • Have you written documentation that is easy to understand?
  • Have you written descriptive commit messages?
  • Have you added NumPy docstrings for newly added functions?
  • Have you formatted your code using black?
  • If you have introduced a new functionality, have you added adequate unit tests?
  • Have all tests passed in your local clone?
  • If you have introduced a new functionality, have you added an example notebook?
  • Have you kept your pull request small and limited so that it is easy to review?
  • Have the newest changes from this branch been merged?

@freemansw1 freemansw1 changed the title Pandas3 support Pandas 3 support Mar 11, 2026
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 11, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.96970% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 64.95%. Comparing base (8639ece) to head (b08cfbe).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on RC_v1.6.x.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
tobac/utils/datetime.py 96.15% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##           RC_v1.6.x     #568      +/-   ##
=============================================
+ Coverage      64.86%   64.95%   +0.09%     
=============================================
  Files             27       27              
  Lines           4047     4066      +19     
=============================================
+ Hits            2625     2641      +16     
- Misses          1422     1425       +3     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 64.95% <96.96%> (+0.09%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 11, 2026

Linting results by Pylint:

Your code has been rated at 8.36/10 (previous run: 8.37/10, -0.01)
The linting score is an indicator that reflects how well your code version follows Pylint’s coding standards and quality metrics with respect to the RC_v1.6.x branch.
A decrease usually indicates your new code does not fully meet style guidelines or has potential errors.

@fsenf fsenf added this to the v.1.6.4 milestone Mar 13, 2026
@freemansw1
Copy link
Member Author

@w-k-jones or @kelcyno are you up to review here?

@kelcyno kelcyno self-assigned this Mar 16, 2026
@w-k-jones
Copy link
Member

I had a quick look through and everything looks good, my only request would be that you add a test for the exception in detect_str_precision (line 197) to reach 100% test coverage 😁

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants