[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-14999?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17581439#comment-17581439
 ] 

Dewey Dunnington commented on ARROW-14999:
------------------------------------------

We do use metadata (extension type + metadata), although the definition of the 
extension types is newer than the memory layout, which was the document that 
proposed the list-child-name-conveying-information strategy. In practice the 
prototype I wrote mostly ignores the list child names, with the exception being 
the name of a point array which conveys its dimension (e.g., xy, xyz, xym, or 
xyzm). Conveying the dimension of the point array using the name was done in 
part to avoid a parser (to parse extension type metadata since it has to be 
valid utf8) when writing C kernels (since 'name' at the C data array level is 
just a null-terminated string). At the time we designed this there was no 
indication that the roundtripping of the child name would be an issue; however, 
we could certainly work around it.

> [C++] List types with different field names are not equal
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARROW-14999
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-14999
>             Project: Apache Arrow
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: C++
>    Affects Versions: 6.0.0
>            Reporter: Will Jones
>            Assignee: Will Jones
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>             Fix For: 10.0.0
>
>          Time Spent: 10m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> When comparing map types, the names of the fields are ignored. This was 
> introduced in ARROW-7173.
> However for list types, they are not ignored. For example,
> {code:python}
> In [6]: l1 = pa.list_(pa.field("val", pa.int64()))
> In [7]: l2 = pa.list_(pa.int64())
> In [8]: l1
> Out[8]: ListType(list<val: int64>)
> In [9]: l2
> Out[9]: ListType(list<item: int64>)
> In [10]: l1 == l2
> Out[10]: False
> {code}
> Should we make list type comparison ignore field names too?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

Reply via email to