Tartarus0zm commented on issue #1856: URL: https://github.com/apache/auron/issues/1856#issuecomment-4116532047
@weiqingy good catch! > Q1: Return type — PhysicalExprNode vs PhysicalPlanNode? I took another look at the POC code, and the `PhysicalExprNode` should be fine. > Q2: Are the sub-interfaces in scope for this PR? I think we can include this in the PR. Do you think this is okay? Please let me know if you have any other questions. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
