ENH: Keep original stack when exception happened in dataframe.apply
when using raise e, the error stack app user received will begin in  _apply_standard method.

Use raise instead, so that user could received error stack in funv(v) call. Easier for user to debug.

Can you show stack traces before and after your change?
 @jtratner 

Before:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "zrs.py", line 137, in <module>
    main()
  File "zrs.py", line 131, in main
    update_rec()
  File "zrs.py", line 119, in update_rec
    runFormula(formula, rec)
  File "zrs.py", line 74, in runFormula
    df.apply(pyformulas.process_similar, axis=1)
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/pandas/core/frame.py", line 4118, in apply
    return self._apply_standard(f, axis)
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/pandas/core/frame.py", line 4193, in _apply_standard
    raise e
TypeError: ('float() argument must be a string or a number', u'occurred at index 122')

After
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "zrs.py", line 137, in <module>
    main()
  File "zrs.py", line 131, in main
    update_rec()
  File "zrs.py", line 119, in update_rec
    runFormula(formula, rec)
  File "zrs.py", line 74, in runFormula
    df.apply(pyformulas.process_similar, axis=1)
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/pandas/core/frame.py", line 4118, in apply
    return self._apply_standard(f, axis)
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/pandas/core/frame.py", line 4182, in _apply_standard
    results[i] = func(v)
  File "/Users/wuvist/Dropbox/zalora/zrs/scripts/pyformulas.py", line 25, in process_similar
    cr = util.getCR(it)
  File "/Users/wuvist/Dropbox/zalora/zrs/scripts/formula_util.py", line 65, in getCR
    return product.Cart / float(product.Views)
TypeError: ('float() argument must be a string or a number', u'occurred at index 122')

# 

This change will help me to location issue in formula_util.py, line 65, in getCR function quickly.

PS: pyformulas.py process_similar function is the function being applied to dataframe.
 +1 this is essential for everyday work and the opaque behaviour was a major deterrent for apply/map/transform/groupby operations.
 @Wuvist 

can you post a complete example (and cut down the traceback to the a couple of the last lines)

ideally if you produce 2 (or more) examples that show different exceptions from the function (e.g. say `NameError`, `TypeError`...etc)....

I am thinking we might have a couple of tests that verify this
 A trivial example (so post the existing and new errors)

```
In [1]: df = DataFrame(randn(10,2),columns=list('AB'))

In [3]: df['grp'] = 'foo'

In [4]: df.ix[5:,'grp'] = 'bar'

In [6]: df.groupby('grp').apply(lambda x: x.sumdf)
AttributeError: 'DataFrame' object has no attribute 'sumdf'
```
 @jreback 

I don't think there is need for tests, this is the standard way of re-raise exception:
http://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/errors.html#raising-exceptions
 the reason for tests are to verify standard pandas behavior, how did you know that a future change preserves this behavior? that is the reason for tests (as the current behavior is wrong)
 @jreback 

Oh, you mean create a new test case in
pandas/tests/test_frame.py
?

But that would be a new pull request, right?

And, I can't figure out a way to write a test case for asserting error stack at the moment, as the stack calling the test itself maybe changed. >_<

There is also no point to checking the exception type being raise, and raise/ raise e give the same type of exception.
 I mean add onto this PR (add another commit)

You don't need to assert the stack, just assert that the exception raises (AND the error message) is what you except

the example I gave above you give a very specific error message (which is different from what I posted).

It is very important to test this as _certain_ higher level operations catch various exceptions and pass them on or raise as needed. This change even though looks very trivial could cause real changes if say you have an embedded apply and something is (maybe erroreously) relying upon a raised exception

here's how to do this (this is testing that the constructors raise correctly)

```
    def test_constructor_error_msgs(self):

        # mix dict and array, wrong size
        def testit():
            DataFrame({'A': {'a': 'a', 'b': 'b'},
                       'B': ['a', 'b', 'c']})
        assertRaisesRegexp(ValueError, "Mixing dicts with non-Series may lead to ambiguous ordering.", testit)

        # wrong size ndarray, GH 3105
        def testit():
            DataFrame(np.arange(12).reshape((4, 3)), columns=['foo', 'bar', 'baz'],
                      index=date_range('2000-01-01', periods=3))
        assertRaisesRegexp(ValueError, "Shape of passed values is \(3, 4\), indices imply \(3, 3\)", testit)
```
 @jreback 

Sorry, but I don't understand.

My PR is about preserving the call stack, not about the exception being raise nor its error message.

The exception raised and the error message is exactly the same before and after my patch.
 is that ALWAYS the case?

are the error messages different?
 @jreback 
Yes, it's ALWAYS the case.

The errors messages are the same before & after this patch.
 ahhh...I thought the applied function error was not bubbling up....so ok then...
 ^_^
 @Wuvist can you set up travis? if u need help doing that i can show u how. thanks
 @cpcloud 

travis? The CI tools? I'm willing to try it. ^_^ 

but, how does travis related to this PR?
 - travis is important for error checking on all distributions / configurations, e.g. something that works on py2.7 might not work with 3.3, or a different numpy
- it gives others a quick read on whether the PR has been error tested

in this case it is probably trivial. but it is good practice. so pls hook up. see contributing.md for a howto

thanks!
 @Wuvist if you have time to rebase this and setup travis - it'd be nice to have this fix.
 closing in favor of #4549
