You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Problem:
We make heavy use of the astropy datastructures (table, column). It is not as widely used, documented, or as fast as pandas. For fits files we can use pyfits, so there should not be a strong reason for us to continue using astropy data structures.
Solution:
Replace astropy data structures with pandas equivalents. Confirm everything still works.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I approve this solution. Hopefully the switch will not be onerous!
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:17 PM, David Thomas [email protected]
wrote:
Problem:
We make heavy use of the astropy datastructures (table, column). It is not
as widely used, documented, or as fast as pandas. For fits files we can use
pyfits, so there should not be a strong reason for us to continue using
astropy data structures.
Solution:
Replace astropy data structures with pandas equivalents. Confirm
everything still works.
Problem:
We make heavy use of the astropy datastructures (table, column). It is not as widely used, documented, or as fast as pandas. For fits files we can use pyfits, so there should not be a strong reason for us to continue using astropy data structures.
Solution:
Replace astropy data structures with pandas equivalents. Confirm everything still works.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: