I also learned today that Apache Spark has dropped support for Java 8 and
11 for their next release (v4.0)[1]. Should we consider dropping Java 11 as
well?
[1]https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/43005
-Dane
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:30 PM Dane Pitkin wrote:
> I created a GH issue[1] proposing
I won't belabour the point any more, but the difference in layout
between a list and a list view is consequential enough to deserve its
own top-level character in my opinion. My vote would be +1 for +vl and
+vL.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 6:40 PM Felipe Oliveira Carvalho
wrote:
>
> > Union format str
> Union format strings share enough properties that having them in the
> same switch case doesn't result in additional complexity...lists and
> list views are completely different types (for the purposes of parsing
> the format string).
Dense and sparse union differ a bit more than list and list-v
I don't think the parsing will be a problem even in C. It's not like you
have to backtrack anyway.
+1 from me on Felipe's proposal.
Regards
Antoine.
Le 05/10/2023 à 20:33, Felipe Oliveira Carvalho a écrit :
This mailing list thread is going to be the discussion.
The union types also use
+vl and +vL sound good to me!
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 5:06 PM Ben Harkins wrote:
>
> Not sure how consequential it'd be in practice, but my first thought is
> that "+vl" and "+vL" (or "+v"/"+V") would require fewer logic changes and
> extra checks for parsers. Plus, establishing a v-prefixed conve
Not sure how consequential it'd be in practice, but my first thought is
that "+vl" and "+vL" (or "+v"/"+V") would require fewer logic changes and
extra checks for parsers. Plus, establishing a v-prefixed convention for
views would avoid those downsides for plain binary types when BinaryView
and Utf
Makes sense.
The only obstacle to +v is: what do we choose for string views and binary
views? They are not nested, so the + prefix of list-view (as it’s nested)
would differentiate them, but is that OK?
—
Felipe
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 16:33 Dewey Dunnington
wrote:
> Union format strings share e
Union format strings share enough properties that having them in the
same switch case doesn't result in additional complexity...lists and
list views are completely different types (for the purposes of parsing
the format string). Is there any reason *not* to use +v and +V? The
switch statements used
I created a GH issue[1] proposing the removal of Java 8 support. It
would target the Arrow v15 release (~Jan 2024).
IMO it would be in the best interest of the project for two major reasons:
1. Unblock the Java Platform Module System (JPMS)[2] implementation.
2. Unblock Arrow from upgrading depend
On behalf of the Arrow PMC, I'm happy to announce that Oleks V. (comphead)
has accepted an invitation to become a committer on Apache
Arrow. Welcome, and thank you for your contributions!
Andrew
This mailing list thread is going to be the discussion.
The union types also use two characters, so I didn’t think it would be a
problem.
—
Felipe
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 15:26 Dewey Dunnington
wrote:
> I'm sorry for missing earlier discussion on this or a PR into the
> format where this discuss
I'm sorry for missing earlier discussion on this or a PR into the
format where this discussion may have occurred...is there a reason
that +lv and +Lv were chosen over a single-character version (i.e.,
maybe +v and +V)? A single-character version is (slightly) easier to
parse in C.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2
There is a vote for Parquet float16 support occurring in the Parquet dev
mailing list:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/gyvqcx9ssxkjlrwogqwy7n4z6ofdm871
As mentioned in the post, there are 3 implementations in preparation for
this vote:
- C++ (and Python): https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/3607
Hello,
I'm writing to propose "+lv" and "+Lv" as format strings for list-view and
large list-view arrays passing through the Arrow C data interface [1].
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 - I'm in favor of this new C Data Format string
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 - I'm against adding this new
Hi All,
@Andrew - thanks for organizing this!
@Kou - thank you for adding notes about the MATLAB bindings!
Sarah (Cc'd) and I added a few more details about progress on the MATLAB
bindings.
Best Regards,
Kevin Gurney
From: Sutou Kouhei
Sent: Wednesday
The fortnightly Arrow R package dev community call is on Thursday 5th
October at 16:30 UTC (12:30 ET).
There is a new URL for joining the call.
Video call link: https://meet.google.com/ghw-qfvv-cjb
The meeting notes can be found here; please feel free to add items to the
agenda:
https://docs.goo
16 matches
Mail list logo
