Remove redundant implementation of StringArrayType
#6743
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tustvold
reviewed
Nov 17, 2024
| @@ -150,39 +151,6 @@ fn like_op(op: Op, lhs: &dyn Datum, rhs: &dyn Datum) -> Result<BooleanArray, Arr | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| /// A trait for Arrow String Arrays, currently three types are supported: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps we could add a pub use to avoid this being a breaking change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh nice, I didn't even know that was possible. TYSM.
Signed-off-by: Tai Le Manh <[email protected]>
tlm365
force-pushed
the
string_array_cleanup
branch
from
df4e07d
to
7e34b7d
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #.
Rationale for this change
StringArrayTypenow moved from [arrow-string] to [arrow-array] for general usage (since #6720). This PR cleans up the previous implementation.What changes are included in this PR?
Are there any user-facing changes?
I'm not sure but maybe this could potentially be marked as API breaking change. Due to we have public the old implementation since #6376, it's possible that downstream users have used it.