API: raise on header=bool in parsers #11182
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pandas/io/tests/test_excel.py
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
test for True as well (in read_csv too)
|
@chris-b1 if you add a release note (put in the API section) can add for 0.17.0 |
chris-b1
force-pushed
the
header-bool-readers
branch
from
20f5147 to
eec2252
Compare
|
@jreback added a doc note and testing for the True case. |
|
tiny doc-change. ping when you push |
chris-b1
force-pushed
the
header-bool-readers
branch
from
eec2252 to
5697abb
Compare
|
@jreback thanks, made that change |
jreback
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 24, 2015
API: raise on header=bool in parsers
|
thank you sir! |
|
Nice! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes #6113
Passing
header=True|Falsetoread_csv(and brethren),read_excel, andread_htmlwill now raise aTypeError, rather than being coerced to an int.I had thought about converting
FalsetoNonebut thought that could break someone's code in a very subtle way if they were somehow depending on the old behavior. But happy to change that if it seems better.If you want to push this in for 0.17 I can add a doc-note or this could easily wait.