-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
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
Rolling statistics #1643
Rolling statistics #1643
Conversation
I've done it as a separate index for now, but we could also just add the |
Co-authored-by: Pascal Bourgault <[email protected]>
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Just so the info is here on GitHub, an issue affecting this PR is that units on a rolling sum are handled wrong, with for example |
I added the last |
@aulemahal Anything missing from this PR? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My approval.
<!--Please ensure the PR fulfills the following requirements! --> <!-- If this is your first PR, make sure to add your details to the AUTHORS.rst! --> ### Pull Request Checklist: - [ ] This PR addresses an already opened issue (for bug fixes / features) - This PR fixes #xyz - [ ] Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features) - [ ] (If applicable) Documentation has been added / updated (for bug fixes / features) - [ ] CHANGELOG.rst has been updated (with summary of main changes) - [ ] Link to issue (:issue:`number`) and pull request (:pull:`number`) has been added ### What kind of change does this PR introduce? * The function was added in #1643, but I just realized that I forgot to expose it in the `__all__`. Thus, it does not appear anywhere in the xclim documentation. ### Does this PR introduce a breaking change? ### Other information:
Pull Request Checklist:
number
) and pull request (:pull:number
) has been addedWhat kind of change does this PR introduce?
xclim.indices.select_rolling_resample_op
that acts in a way similar toselect_resample_op
, but with a rolling window beforehand.Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information: