thisisnic commented on code in PR #33614:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/33614#discussion_r1072381276
##########
r/R/dataset-format.R:
##########
@@ -228,9 +225,32 @@ check_csv_file_format_args <- function(...) {
call. = FALSE
)
}
+}
+
+get_opt_names <- function(args) {
+ opt_names <- names(args)
+
+ # extract names of parse_options, read_options, and convert_options
+ if ("parse_options" %in% names(args) && is.list(args[["parse_options"]])) {
Review Comment:
`parse_options = CsvParseOptions$create(...)` is the way that users have
been doing things thus far as passing in lists is new - this additional way of
doing things only got merged in in the past few weeks. I'm not sure what the
right call is here; I don't want to error on passing in a CsvParseOptions
object and break folks' existing code but do want to encourage passing in
options as a list so it actually hits our validation code.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
