Github user maropu commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21804#discussion_r203585703
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/types/AbstractDataType.scala
---
@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ abstract class NumericType extends AtomicType {
}
-private[sql] object NumericType extends AbstractDataType {
+private[spark] object NumericType extends AbstractDataType {
--- End diff --
(This is just a question...) Is it ok for some types to have
`private[spark]` and the others to have `private[sql]`? I feel a little
inconsistent policy for that. Since the other components (e.g., `ml` and
`mllib`) depend on the `sql` type system, is it bad to make all the modifiers
in their types `private[spark]` consistently?
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
