-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
duckdb.sql(prql.compile())
v.s. df.prql.query()
?
#156
Comments
duckdb::sql(prql.compile())
v.s. df.prql.query()
?duckdb.sql(prql.compile())
v.s. df.prql.query()
?
Great, to confirm — do you mean we should mention this as an option in the docs? Or we should use |
I intended to update only the documentation for now. But I think it is worth creating a new function based on |
IIUC, the current pyprql/pyprql/pandas_accessor/prql.py Line 30 in 393bc65
The accessor offers a method on a DataFrame, which is often more convenient than running Does this make sense or am I misunderstanding? |
I agree that the Do we need the Are there any other members of |
Yes, I agree that methods are sometimes more convenient. |
That does not seem to be allowed. |
They work almost identically for
pandas.DataFrame
, and the former would work forpolars.DataFrame
andpyarrow.Table
.Probably needs to be mentioned somewhere... (Related to #151)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: