Implement Ord for DataType #4920
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tustvold
reviewed
Oct 11, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As this behaviour is extremely use-case specific, I think it might be better implemented in DataFusion, perhaps using the newtype pattern - https://doc.rust-lang.org/rust-by-example/generics/new_types.html
This would also resolve the issue with this PR where the implementation of Eq differs from Ord, which is prohibited by the traits
| if a.is_primitive() && b.is_primitive() { | ||
| self.primitive_width() | ||
| .unwrap_or(0) | ||
| .cmp(&other.primitive_width().unwrap_or(0)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is inconsistent with the implementation of Eq and is therefore ill-formed
|
Thanks for your feedback @tustvold. I'll do it in DataFusion |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #4919 (Compare
DataTypebased on memory size).Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
Are there any user-facing changes?
These changes will alter the way
DataTypeis ordered. Users who rely on the current ordering, which is just the basic derived implementation forOrd, might be affected.