Support Arbitrary Number of Arrays in downcast_primitive_array #2809
Conversation
| @@ -50,427 +62,183 @@ macro_rules! downcast_primitive_array { | |||
| ($values:ident => $e:expr, $($p:pat => $fallback:expr $(,)*)*) => { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I eventually hope to split the core logic of downcast_primitive_array into something which maps DataType => ArrowPrimitiveType but this is the first step towards that
tustvold
force-pushed
the
simplify-downcast-primitive
branch
from
cf967b8
to
7979eea
Compare
tustvold
force-pushed
the
simplify-downcast-primitive
branch
from
7979eea
to
f100521
Compare
tustvold
force-pushed
the
simplify-downcast-primitive
branch
from
f100521
to
ff98c00
Compare
| /// Repeats the provided pattern based on the number of comma separated identifiers | ||
| #[doc(hidden)] | ||
| #[macro_export] | ||
| macro_rules! repeat_pat { | ||
| ($e:pat, $v_:ident) => { | ||
| $e | ||
| }; | ||
| ($e:pat, $v_:ident $(, $tail:ident)+) => { | ||
| ($e, $crate::repeat_pat!($e $(, $tail)+)) | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, this is interesting. Nice. 馃憤
| (($($values:ident),+) => $e:block $(($($p:pat),+) => $fallback:expr $(,)*)*) => { | ||
| $crate::downcast_primitive_array!($($values),+ => $e $($($p),+ => $fallback)*) | ||
| }; | ||
| ($($values:ident),+ => $e:block $($($p:pat),+ => $fallback:expr $(,)*)*) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The number of $p:pat might be different to $values:ident and that will cause error. But the caller should take care of it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, as this is impersonating a match block, I think that is fine
| (($($values:ident),+) => $e:block $($($p:pat),+ => $fallback:expr $(,)*)*) => { | ||
| $crate::downcast_primitive_array!($($values),+ => $e $($($p),+ => $fallback)*) | ||
| }; | ||
| (($($values:ident),+) => $e:block $(($($p:pat),+) => $fallback:expr $(,)*)*) => { | ||
| $crate::downcast_primitive_array!($($values),+ => $e $($($p),+ => $fallback)*) | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the difference between this and below? With additional ( )?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, because typically single arguments are not enclosed in ( ) but multiple are, this allows both patterns
|
Benchmark runs are scheduled for baseline = c8321f4 and contender = 2ae2309. 2ae2309 is a master commit associated with this PR. Results will be available as each benchmark for each run completes. |
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #.
Rationale for this change
Uses some macro trickery to allow arbitrary numbers of arrays in downcast_primitive_array. Not only is this potentially useful, it reduces code duplication and yields better consistency. Unfortunately this consistency is back-firing slightly, as support for Float16 SIMD arithmetic is not implemented, and this was just left out of the macro 馃槄
What changes are included in this PR?
Are there any user-facing changes?
Float16Array will be downcast in the binary invocation, this probably counts as an API change