Github user uce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/729#discussion_r31527840
--- Diff:
flink-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/api/common/UdfAnalysisMode.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.flink.api.common;
+
+/**
+ * Specifies to which extent user-defined functions are analyzed in order
+ * to give the Flink optimizer an insight of UDF internals and inform
+ * the user about common implementation mistakes.
+ *
+ */
+public enum UdfAnalysisMode {
--- End diff --
This is user-facing. I vote to rename it. @rmetzger agrees that in his
experience the UDF part can be misleading. I understand why you chose this
though... the operators make use of the UDF term all over the place. What about
`CodeAnalysisMode`? After all both this PR and the package are called *code
analysis* and not UDF analysis.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
