alamb commented on code in PR #14268:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/14268#discussion_r1932866009
##########
datafusion/functions/src/string/bit_length.rs:
##########
@@ -55,7 +58,10 @@ impl Default for BitLengthFunc {
impl BitLengthFunc {
pub fn new() -> Self {
Self {
- signature: Signature::string(1, Volatility::Immutable),
+ signature: Signature::coercible(
Review Comment:
as a minor comment this new signature is quite a bit of a mouthful compared
to `Signature::string`
It isn't clear to me from reading the code / comments when one would prefer
to use one over the other (not related to this PR)
##########
datafusion/functions/src/string/contains.rs:
##########
@@ -59,7 +64,13 @@ impl Default for ContainsFunc {
impl ContainsFunc {
pub fn new() -> Self {
Self {
- signature: Signature::string(2, Volatility::Immutable),
Review Comment:
@jayzhan211 / @notfilippo should we deprecate `Signature::string` and
direct people to `Signature::coerceable`?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-h...@datafusion.apache.org
