>
> I wonder how arrow deals with gaps among different implementations? Say,
> C++ lib implements some features go lib doesn't support. Is there a
> consistent API document, or documents for each language implementation?
It is important to distinguish between two types of functionality:
1. Suppo
Hi Wes,
On 10/30/19 10:24 PM, Wes McKinney wrote:
hi Yibo
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 2:16 AM Yibo Cai wrote:
Hi,
I'm new to Arrow. Would like to seek for help about some questions. Any comment
is welcomed.
- About source code tree, my understand is that "cpp" is the core arrow libraries,
"c
Thanks Wes, Micah, your comments are very helpful.
Yibo
On 10/30/19 10:45 PM, Wes McKinney wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 9:32 AM Micah Kornfield wrote:
- I see some SIMD optimizations in arrow go binding, such as vectored
sum. [2]
But arrow cpp lib doesn't leverage SIMD. [3]
Wh
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 9:32 AM Micah Kornfield wrote:
>
> >
> > > - I see some SIMD optimizations in arrow go binding, such as vectored
> > sum. [2]
> > >But arrow cpp lib doesn't leverage SIMD. [3]
> > >Why not optimize it in cpp lib so all languages can benefit?
> > You're welcome to co
>
> > - I see some SIMD optimizations in arrow go binding, such as vectored
> sum. [2]
> >But arrow cpp lib doesn't leverage SIMD. [3]
> >Why not optimize it in cpp lib so all languages can benefit?
> You're welcome to contribute such optimizations to the C++ library
Note that even though
hi Yibo
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 2:16 AM Yibo Cai wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to Arrow. Would like to seek for help about some questions. Any
> comment is welcomed.
>
> - About source code tree, my understand is that "cpp" is the core arrow
> libraries, "c_glib, go, python, ..." are language bind
