paleolimbot commented on issue #35531: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/35531#issuecomment-1726473504
I would be ever-so-slightly in favour of not using the device version for the initial protocol but I also agree that it's worth ensuring that it is implemented in such a way that it doesn't block a future protocol that supports the device-enabled version. I don't think that it would be all that difficult for producers where this matters to implement a (hypothetical, future) `__arrow_c_device_array__` and/or `__arrow_c_device_array_stream__`; however, converting those structures to the equivalent non-device versions in C is fairly difficult (would require something like nanoarrow or much wider support for working with those structs in the ecosystem). If a future consumer wants a device array but is given an object that only implements `__arrow_c_array__` or `__arrow_c_array_stream__`, chances are they have an implementation at their disposal that can make that conversion (whereas the reverse is less likely to be true). -- 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]
