Viral, Can you give specific examples where NA caused troubles for you? Were they performance problems or something else?
If we get multi-theading really solid halfway to 0.4, we can probably use it in some of the NullableArrays code to speed up operations on vectors. -- John On Sep 11, 2014, at 5:05 AM, Viral Shah <[email protected]> wrote: > The state of NA has always been where I stop using DataFrames - and I think > this roadmap is perfect to coincide with the 0.4 release. > > What are your thoughts on multi-threading, should we be able to land that in > 0.4? Perhaps we can speed up some easily parallelizable operations. > > -viral > > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 11:47:44 AM UTC+5:30, John Myles White wrote: > Yeah, that’s a way more ambitious project. That’ll take at least a year to > make any progress at all. Before I could even begin, I need to finish DBI and > then build up something SQLAlchemy for Julia. > > Thankfully, the 0.4 changes should put DataFrames in a good state that we can > depend on for some time into the future. > > — John > > On Sep 6, 2014, at 11:15 PM, Iain Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I saw on some list/issue you were thinking of working on a more fresh >> approach to the whole data storage situation - is that post 0.4? >> >> On Saturday, September 6, 2014 10:30:04 PM UTC-4, John Myles White wrote: >> I am hoping that the 0.4 release of Julia will coincide with a major cleanup >> of the Data* world. I wrote up a very high level overview of my goals here: >> https://gist.github.com/johnmyleswhite/ad5305ecaa9de01e317e >> >> There’s still more work to do to flesh out these ideas, but the basic >> principles are pretty close to finalized. There’s also a rough draft of much >> of the core functionality we’ll need to add to support this roadmap. >> >> I wanted to give everyone a heads up so that people understand where the >> Data* packages are headed. The big idea is that we’ll be pushing more work >> out into the type system, which will give substantial performance >> improvements. >> >> — John >> >
