Return a null might be more correct since `getObject(int index)` also return a null value if not set, but I don't think it's worth making a more complicated API for this. It should be fine to return `false` for a null value. +1 for treating nulls as empty.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 9:12 AM Brian Hulette <hulet...@gmail.com> wrote: > What about returning null for a null list? It looks like now the function > returns a primitive boolean, so I guess that would be a substantial change, > but null seems more correct to me. > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 21:38 Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I would vote for treating nulls as empty. > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:36 AM Ji Liu <niki...@aliyun.com.invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Currently isEmpty API is always return false in > BaseRepeatedValueVector, > > > and its subclass ListVector did not overwrite this method. > > > This will lead to incorrect result, for example, a ListVector with data > > > [1,2], null, [], [5,6] would get [false, false, false, false] which is > > not > > > right. > > > I opened a PR to fix this[1] and not sure what’s the right behavior for > > > null value, should it return [false, false, true, false] or [false, > true, > > > true, false] ? > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Ji Liu > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6044 > > > > > > > > >
