[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-12148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15043625#comment-15043625
]
Michael Lawrence commented on SPARK-12148:
------------------------------------------
Not only would the constructor symbol conflict be highly annoying (R users have
little patience for such conflicts as they are typically programming
interactively), but there would also be ambiguity when specifying method
signatures, inheritance relationships, etc in packages bridging the frameworks.
While I can appreciate your desire for consistency, please realize that the
name "data frame" is deeply rooted in R, so I'm not sure it's realistic to come
into R and expect to use that name without qualification. The S4Vector
DataFrame is the S4 analog of the base data.frame, with the name adjusted to
conform to S4 class naming conventions. Interfaces to external systems should
qualify somehow. While the name SparkDataFrame would break consistency with
other interfaces, it would have the benefit of clarity, since data frame is
such an overloaded term in R.
> SparkR: rename DataFrame to SparkDataFrame
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-12148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-12148
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Wish
> Components: R, SparkR
> Reporter: Michael Lawrence
> Priority: Minor
>
> The SparkR package represents a Spark DataFrame with the class "DataFrame".
> That conflicts with the more general DataFrame class defined in the S4Vectors
> package. Would it not be more appropriate to use the name "SparkDataFrame"
> instead?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
