u omit the four elephants?
> How could the universe rest on a convex turtle shell without them?
>
> Until this glaring fault is addressed I am -0
>
> Am Di., 1. Apr. 2025 um 21:35 Uhr schrieb Curt Hagenlocher
> :
> >
> > You bet your sweet ass I am.
> >
> >
I concur. +1
On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 8:52 PM Weston Pace wrote:
> I've written a draft at [1] but for simplicity's sake I will include the
> text of the proposal inline below.
>
> [1] https://github.com/westonpace/arrow/tree/feat/turtle-extension-type
>
> TURTLE
> ==
>
> * Extension name: ``a
I'm interested to hear what the relation between arrow2, arrow-rs and the
main github apache/arrow is. Is the intention to replace the C++ codebase
with a rust implementation?
The reason I'm asking is that I'm adding complex number support in the C++
codebase. It may instead be a better idea to do
ome more exploratory coding with the pure ExtensionType which
should certainly
make life easier!
>
> Le 21/06/2021 à 15:54, Simon Perkins a écrit :
> > To put it another way, an Extension Type technically has Type::EXTENSION,
> > but now there's Type::COMPLEX_FLOAT and Type
N?
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 3:11 PM Simon Perkins
wrote:
> I did some exploratory coding adding Complex Numbers as ExtensionTypes in
> this PR: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/10565
>
> > My understanding is that it means having COMPLEX as an entry in the
> arrow/type_fwd.h T
needed it until now (or at least, its absence suggests
> > > this)
> > > > > > > shows that this is the case.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 4:17 PM Micah Kornfield <
> > > > emkornfi.
gt; > common type
> > > > > in SQL systems either.
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason why I am being nit-picky here is I think that having a
> > first
> > > > > class type indicates that it should eventually be supported by all
> > &g
take this approach.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree from an implementation effort it is simpler, but I'm
> > still
> > > > not
> > > > > > > convinced that we should be adding t
On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 7:56 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Le 09/06/2021 à 17:52, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
> >
> > Adding a new first-class type in Arrow requires working integration tests
> > between C++ and Java libraries (once the idea is informally agreed upon)
> > and then a final vote for ap
On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 11:25 PM Wes McKinney wrote:
> I think that having a top-level type for complex numbers would be
> nicer than extension types
Agreed. As Micha mentioned, adding these types don't seem to interfere with
any existing protocol, I'd like to take this approach going forward.
computation wouldn't be required for adding a new type.
> Different language bindings have taken different approaches on how much
> additional computational elements are packaged in them.
>
Agreed, Complex Types should be covered by integration tests.
regards,
Simon
> On
Max operations) or
whether Arrow is merely concerned with the underlying data representation.
Thanks for considering this.
Simon Perkins
12 matches
Mail list logo
