Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Jacek Laskowski]

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 5:27 AM, Hyukjin Kwon  wrote:
> Then, are we going to submit a PR and fix this maybe?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-17656

Thanks Hyukjin! Unless someone beats me to it, I'm going to have a PR
over the weekend.

Jacek

-
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Hyukjin Kwon]

Then, are we going to submit a PR and fix this maybe?

On 9 Sep 2016 9:30 p.m., "Sean Owen" <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Oh I get it now. I was necessary in the past. Sure, seems like it
> could be standardized now.
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote:
> > Yea but the earlier email was asking they were introduced in the first
> > place.
> >
> >
> > On Friday, September 9, 2016, Marcelo Vanzin <van...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Not after SPARK-14642, right?
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>
> wrote:
> >> > There is a package called scala.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Friday, September 9, 2016, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I was also actually wondering why it is being written like this.
> >> >>
> >> >> I actually took a look for this before and wanted to fix them but I
> >> >> found
> >> >> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12077/files#r58041468
> >> >>
> >> >> So, I kind of persuaded myself that committers already know about it
> >> >> and
> >> >> there is a reason for this.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd like to know the full details why we don't import but write full
> >> >> path
> >> >> though.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 9 Sep 2016 5:28 a.m., "Jakob Odersky" <ja...@odersky.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
> >> >>> In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
> >> >>> case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>> > I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
> >> >>> > @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
> >> >>> > import varargs and write @varargs?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>
> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >>> >> Hi,
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs
> >> >>> >> annotation.
> >> >>> >> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like
> >> >>> >> DataFrameReader
> >> >>> >> or functions as well as examples of
> >> >>> >> @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
> >> >>> >> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs
> only.
> >> >>> >> WDYT?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Pozdrawiam,
> >> >>> >> Jacek Laskowski
> >> >>> >> 
> >> >>> >> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
> >> >>> >> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
> >> >>> >> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> 
> -
> >> >>> >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > 
> -
> >> >>> > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 
> -
> >> >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Marcelo
>

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Sean Owen]

Oh I get it now. I was necessary in the past. Sure, seems like it
could be standardized now.

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote:
> Yea but the earlier email was asking they were introduced in the first
> place.
>
>
> On Friday, September 9, 2016, Marcelo Vanzin <van...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> Not after SPARK-14642, right?
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote:
>> > There is a package called scala.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Friday, September 9, 2016, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was also actually wondering why it is being written like this.
>> >>
>> >> I actually took a look for this before and wanted to fix them but I
>> >> found
>> >> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12077/files#r58041468
>> >>
>> >> So, I kind of persuaded myself that committers already know about it
>> >> and
>> >> there is a reason for this.
>> >>
>> >> I'd like to know the full details why we don't import but write full
>> >> path
>> >> though.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 9 Sep 2016 5:28 a.m., "Jakob Odersky" <ja...@odersky.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
>> >>> In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
>> >>> case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> >>> > I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
>> >>> > @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
>> >>> > import varargs and write @varargs?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >> Hi,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs
>> >>> >> annotation.
>> >>> >> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like
>> >>> >> DataFrameReader
>> >>> >> or functions as well as examples of
>> >>> >> @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
>> >>> >> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only.
>> >>> >> WDYT?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Pozdrawiam,
>> >>> >> Jacek Laskowski
>> >>> >> 
>> >>> >> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
>> >>> >> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
>> >>> >> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> -
>> >>> >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -
>> >>> > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> -
>> >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Marcelo

-
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Reynold Xin]

Yea but the earlier email was asking they were introduced in the first
place.

On Friday, September 9, 2016, Marcelo Vanzin  wrote:

> Not after SPARK-14642, right?
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Reynold Xin  > wrote:
> > There is a package called scala.
> >
> >
> > On Friday, September 9, 2016, Hyukjin Kwon  > wrote:
> >>
> >> I was also actually wondering why it is being written like this.
> >>
> >> I actually took a look for this before and wanted to fix them but I
> found
> >> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12077/files#r58041468
> >>
> >> So, I kind of persuaded myself that committers already know about it and
> >> there is a reason for this.
> >>
> >> I'd like to know the full details why we don't import but write full
> path
> >> though.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9 Sep 2016 5:28 a.m., "Jakob Odersky"  > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
> >>> In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
> >>> case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen  > wrote:
> >>> > I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
> >>> > @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
> >>> > import varargs and write @varargs?
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski  >
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs
> annotation.
> >>> >> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like
> DataFrameReader
> >>> >> or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.
> varargs,
> >>> >> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only.
> >>> >> WDYT?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Pozdrawiam,
> >>> >> Jacek Laskowski
> >>> >> 
> >>> >> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
> >>> >> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
> >>> >> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 
> -
> >>> >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> 
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > 
> -
> >>> > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> 
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org 
> >>>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Marcelo
>

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Marcelo Vanzin]

Not after SPARK-14642, right?

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote:
> There is a package called scala.
>
>
> On Friday, September 9, 2016, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I was also actually wondering why it is being written like this.
>>
>> I actually took a look for this before and wanted to fix them but I found
>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12077/files#r58041468
>>
>> So, I kind of persuaded myself that committers already know about it and
>> there is a reason for this.
>>
>> I'd like to know the full details why we don't import but write full path
>> though.
>>
>>
>> On 9 Sep 2016 5:28 a.m., "Jakob Odersky" <ja...@odersky.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
>>> In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
>>> case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>> > I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
>>> > @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
>>> > import varargs and write @varargs?
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs annotation.
>>> >> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like DataFrameReader
>>> >> or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
>>> >> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
>>> >>
>>> >> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only.
>>> >> WDYT?
>>> >>
>>> >> Pozdrawiam,
>>> >> Jacek Laskowski
>>> >> 
>>> >> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
>>> >> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
>>> >> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
>>> >>
>>> >> -
>>> >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>>> >
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>>>
>



-- 
Marcelo

-
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Reynold Xin]

There is a package called scala.

On Friday, September 9, 2016, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was also actually wondering why it is being written like this.
>
> I actually took a look for this before and wanted to fix them but I found
> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12077/files#r58041468
>
> So, I kind of persuaded myself that committers already know about it and
> there is a reason for this.
>
> I'd like to know the full details why we don't import but write full path
> though.
>
> On 9 Sep 2016 5:28 a.m., "Jakob Odersky" <ja...@odersky.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ja...@odersky.com');>> wrote:
>
>> +1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
>> In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
>> case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','so...@cloudera.com');>> wrote:
>> > I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
>> > @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
>> > import varargs and write @varargs?
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ja...@japila.pl');>> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs annotation.
>> >> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like DataFrameReader
>> >> or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
>> >> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
>> >>
>> >> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only.
>> WDYT?
>> >>
>> >> Pozdrawiam,
>> >> Jacek Laskowski
>> >> 
>> >> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
>> >> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
>> >> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
>> >>
>> >> -
>> >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org');>
>> >>
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org');>
>> >
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org');>
>>
>>

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Hyukjin Kwon]

I was also actually wondering why it is being written like this.

I actually took a look for this before and wanted to fix them but I found
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12077/files#r58041468

So, I kind of persuaded myself that committers already know about it and
there is a reason for this.

I'd like to know the full details why we don't import but write full path
though.

On 9 Sep 2016 5:28 a.m., "Jakob Odersky" <ja...@odersky.com> wrote:

> +1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
> In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
> case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
> > @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
> > import varargs and write @varargs?
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs annotation.
> >> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like DataFrameReader
> >> or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
> >> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
> >>
> >> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only.
> WDYT?
> >>
> >> Pozdrawiam,
> >> Jacek Laskowski
> >> 
> >> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
> >> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
> >> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> >>
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>
>

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Jakob Odersky]

+1 to Sean's answer, importing varargs.
In this case the _root_ is also unnecessary (it would be required in
case you were using it in a nested package called "scala" itself)

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
> @scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
> import varargs and write @varargs?
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs annotation.
>> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like DataFrameReader
>> or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
>> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
>>
>> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only. WDYT?
>>
>> Pozdrawiam,
>> Jacek Laskowski
>> 
>> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
>> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
>> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Re: @scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Sean Owen]

I think the @_root_ version is redundant because
@scala.annotation.varargs is redundant. Actually wouldn't we just
import varargs and write @varargs?

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs annotation.
> There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like DataFrameReader
> or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
> e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.
>
> I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only. WDYT?
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Jacek Laskowski
> 
> https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
> Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
> Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski
>
> -
> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

@scala.annotation.varargs or @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs?

[Jacek Laskowski]

Hi,

The code is not consistent with @scala.annotation.varargs annotation.
There are classes with @scala.annotation.varargs like DataFrameReader
or functions as well as examples of @_root_.scala.annotation.varargs,
e.g. Window or UserDefinedAggregateFunction.

I think it should be consistent and @scala.annotation.varargs only. WDYT?

Pozdrawiam,
Jacek Laskowski

https://medium.com/@jaceklaskowski/
Mastering Apache Spark 2.0 http://bit.ly/mastering-apache-spark
Follow me at https://twitter.com/jaceklaskowski

-
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org