Add Field::new_list_field and improve DataType::new_list docs
#4627
Conversation
alamb
force-pushed
the
alamb/new_list_and_docs
branch
from
76f4fe3
to
7fb3d98
Compare
arrow-schema/src/field.rs
Outdated
| /// Field::new("item", DataType::Int32, true), | ||
| /// Field::new_list_item(DataType::Int32, true) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It does occur to me that this is now longer 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But it is more explict / discoverable
Maybe Field::new_list_field? or Field::new_list?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't feel strongly, I personally don't see the issue with "item" but we're going to have to agree to disagree there 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess new_list_field? As this is to create a field.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great idea -- done in 76b1e70
|
I'll give this PR a few more days to see if anyone else has thoughts / comments |
Co-authored-by: Liang-Chi Hsieh <viirya@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Liang-Chi Hsieh <viirya@gmail.com>
|
How should we proceed with this one? |
|
I will polish it up and get it merged |
alamb
changed the title
Field::new_list_item and improve DataType::new_list docsField::new_list_field and improve DataType::new_list docs
|
FYI here is a bug in DataFusion related to not following the conventions apache/datafusion#9441 (and hence another reason in my mind that this API has value) |
Which issue does this PR close?
Re #4544
Rationale for this change
As described on #4561 (comment) the API for creating List fields is somewhat confusing and hiding details of doing so may make it more so.
What changes are included in this PR?
Field::new_list_itemField::new_list_fieldDataType::new_listdocsAre there any user-facing changes?
Yes a new API for constructing
Fields and better docs