OK. I'll take it. Best Regards, Shixiong Zhu
2014-11-14 12:34 GMT+08:00 Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>: > That seems like a great idea. Can you submit a pull request? > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Shixiong Zhu <zsxw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If we put the `implicit` into "pacakge object rdd" or "object rdd", when >> we write `rdd.groupbykey()`, because rdd is an object of RDD, Scala >> compiler will search `object rdd`(companion object) and `package object >> rdd`(pacakge >> object) by default. We don't need to import them explicitly. Here is a >> post about the implicit search logic: >> http://eed3si9n.com/revisiting-implicits-without-import-tax >> >> To maintain the compatibility, we can keep `rddToPairRDDFunctions` in >> the SparkContext but remove `implicit`. The disadvantage is there are >> two copies of same codes. >> >> >> >> >> Best Regards, >> Shixiong Zhu >> >> 2014-11-14 3:57 GMT+08:00 Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>: >> >>> Do people usually important o.a.spark.rdd._ ? >>> >>> Also in order to maintain source and binary compatibility, we would need >>> to keep both right? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Shixiong Zhu <zsxw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I saw many people asked how to convert a RDD to a PairRDDFunctions. I >>>> would >>>> like to ask a question about it. Why not put the following implicit into >>>> "pacakge object rdd" or "object rdd"? >>>> >>>> implicit def rddToPairRDDFunctions[K, V](rdd: RDD[(K, V)]) >>>> (implicit kt: ClassTag[K], vt: ClassTag[V], ord: Ordering[K] = >>>> null) >>>> = { >>>> new PairRDDFunctions(rdd) >>>> } >>>> >>>> If so, the converting will be automatic and not need to >>>> import org.apache.spark.SparkContext._ >>>> >>>> I tried to search some discussion but found nothing. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Shixiong Zhu >>>> >>> >>> >> >
