On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 7:56 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> 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 approval. We haven't formalized extension > types > > but I imagine a similar cross language requirement would be agreed upon. > > Implementation of 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. > > While dedicated types are not strictly required, compute functions would > be much easier to add for a first-class dedicated complex datatype > rather than for an extension type. > > Since complex numbers are quite common in some domains, and since they > are conceptually simply, IMHO it would make sense to add them to the > native Arrow datatypes (at least COMPLEX64 and COMPLEX128). > I'm convinced now that first-class types seem to be the way to go and I'm happy to take this approach. Regarding compute functions, it looks like the standard set of scalar arithmetic and reduction functionality is desirable for complex numbers: https://arrow.apache.org/docs/cpp/compute.html# Perhaps it would be better to split the addition of the Types and addition Compute functionality into separate PRs? Regarding the process for managing this PR, it sounds like a proposal must be voted on? i.e. is this proposal still in this phase http://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/contributing.html#before-starting Regards Simon
