Never mind, I just saw your update on the JIRA :-)

Thanks.

On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:12 PM, Andy Grove <[email protected]> wrote:

> OK, so I may have misunderstood this a bit. It sounds like it would be
> better for more people to contribute to my fork? This could be workable.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andy.
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> hi Andy,
>>
>> > What exactly is the approval process? I know this is slightly tricky
>> because this PR is for a language that the current contributors generally
>> don't have experience with.
>>
>> Ideally once this gets off the ground with multiple active
>> contributors, it would be nice too have another contributor
>> acknowledge that they've taken a look at a patch and that it looks
>> good. In the meantime, committers can merge the patches as long as the
>> build isn't broken.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Wes
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Andy Grove <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > As you've probably seen, I have been working away on
>> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/1804
>> >
>> > Most recently I had started adding type-safe traits for performing
>> > operations on arrays.
>> >
>> > For example:
>> >
>> > trait ArrayOps<T> {
>> >     fn compare(&self, other: &Array, f: &Fn(T,T) -> bool) ->
>> > Result<Vec<bool>, Error>;
>> >     fn compute(&self, other: &Array, f: &Fn(T,T) -> T) -> Result<Vec<T>,
>> > Error>;
>> > }
>> >
>> > This makes it easy to perform operations on arrays using closures.
>> >
>> > let a = Array::from(vec![1,2,3,4,5]);
>> > let b = Array::from(vec![5,4,3,2,1]);
>> > let c = a.compute(&b, &|a: i32,b: i32| a * b).unwrap();
>> > assert_eq!(c, vec![5,8,9,8,5]);
>> >
>> > I'm a bit concerned that I'm working alone on the PR and wanted to see
>> if
>> > there is a better way since there are others who are waiting to start
>> > contributing.
>> >
>> > I would really like to see the current PR merged so that they can jump
>> in
>> > too.
>> >
>> > What exactly is the approval process? I know this is slightly tricky
>> > because this PR is for a language that the current contributors
>> generally
>> > don't have experience with.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Andy.
>>
>
>

Reply via email to