Maybe remove the dependency on DataFrames?

[yeesian]

since it doesn't actually require functionality from DataFrames. DataArrays will likely be replaced with NullableArrays at some point (if you're interested, you can also see https://gist.github.com/johnmyleswhite/04f7b4fe3df76ea72f69). Maybe use a Dict of NullableArrays for now?

[penntaylor]

So instead of keeping records intact in a DataFrame or SubDataFrame when filtering, you'd instead do something like

indices = find(foo, records)

and then use the indices to index into any of the data columns or the shape array?

I played around with NullableArrays for a bit...is there some easier way to do anything with their contained values other than constantly wrapping everything in get() (or wrapping everything else in the world in Nullable()?

[yeesian]

Yeah, it does sound rather un-useful for now. I wrote utilities like https://github.com/yeesian/GeoConverters.jl to convert stuff to dataframes/compose-graphics/etc for that reason.

Although Shapefile doesn't return results in a DataFrame as well, the decision on removing dataframes isn't set in stone though. It's just that it'll require a good argument for having it in this package, versus having the user convert it themselves. If you're convinced that it should stay etc, I'd be okay with that too.

[penntaylor]

What about using a Dict of DataArrays for now? That would narrow the dependency down from the entirety of DataFrames to only DataArrays, would fit in with the indexing semantics of Shapefile, and would make an eventual transition to NullableArrays fairly straightforward.

[yeesian]

That sounds sensible 👍