-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 968
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
EVERYONE: Removing the 'fillna' keyword option if there is no opposition! #780
Comments
Hey @luisbarrancos Am I wrong in assuming that is easier to 'fillna' in one go in the post processing phase after applying indicators than handling each indicator individually? KJ |
@twopirllc Out of curiosity, is this concern arising primarily due to changes in Pandas>2.1 related to the I'm actually reconsidering my vote. On the other side, we do have a bit of conundrum in that some indicators might require different fill methods and different platforms might expect different initializations. That is the responsibility of whomever writes the indicators. However, if your indicator relies on previous indicators, such as a SMA or EMA, you might need to override locally the initialization in order to match some platform, or duplicate code. The TMO, just to name an example, would benefit from forward fills, but then again, it should not produce NaNs if given clean time-series, with the exception of course, of requiring N data points to produce the 1st value. Whomever writes the indicator might prefer, to avoid code duplication, just call existing indicators and change the timeseries initialization in the call itself. This is advantageous and avoids code duplication. But in practice I'm not sure we're going to be seeing this done, outside of the SMA, EMA and other weighted moving averages that might require different initializations. I fear I might've brought more doubts into the discussion, rather than enlightenment, but overall simplicity would be best, so removal of the |
Hi @luisbarrancos,
🤣 But really, thanks for commenting back with some excellent points on both sides of the spectrum.
✅ My current plan is to remove them before updating main, which will be awhile unfortunately, so there is still some time for other's opinions for the case of keeping them. Thanks for the feedback |
Hello All,
First of all, thanks for using Pandas TA!
It would not have made it this far along without the generous help of those that have contributed in many ways. Unfortunately there is still a lot that needs to be accomplished before main is updated. If you are looking for immediate improvements or found some bugs in v0.3.14b, please try the development version first.
Anyhow, this is a notice that the keyword 'fillna' in each indicator will be removed since it is likely unused code and just wasting space. If you use it, please provide a 👍🏼 otherwise a 👎🏼. Feel free to add more detail of why it should be kept if you use it.
For Pandas TA to endure, please consider submitting a donation or sponsoring via GitHub or Buy me a Coffee.
Thank you ❤️
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: