paleolimbot commented on issue #347: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/issues/347#issuecomment-1869851470
> Should we allow `infer_nanoarrow_schema()` on schema objects? I was initially rather careful to separate `as_nanoarrow_schema()` (i.e., I'm looking for a data type, get me that data type as a nanoarrow schema!) and `infer_nanoarrow_schema()` (i.e., what would the schema be after I call `as_nanoarrow_array()` on this thing). In R that's sort of confusing because we don't have data type objects (just zero-size vectors). At this point it seems like the lack of `infer_nanoarrow_schema.nanoarrow_schema()` is just adding confusion? I don't think it would hurt to add it. > Should we allow `infer_nanoarrow_ptype()` on R objects, effectively emulating data roundtrip? I think that would maybe be confusing...`vec_ptype()` and `infer_nanoarrow_ptype()` may potentially return different things. If it were added to nanoarrow I would prefer to call it `ptype_after_roundtrip()` or something similarly descriptive. Or maybe DBI just wants to know if something will roundtrip or not? -- 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: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
