alamb opened a new issue, #10097:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/10097

   ### Is your feature request related to a problem or challenge?
   
   Part of #8913 
   
   While working on the documentation in  
https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/10035, @peter-toth made the 
great observation  
https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/10035#discussion_r1562648720 
that:
   
   > I have no idea why we have the ..._mut() version, most likely for just 
convenience, but IMO one transform_down() with FnMut should be fair enough.
   
   
   Specifically, these methods are basically the same, except that `_mut` takes 
a mutable reference to the closure
   * `transform_down` / `transform_down_mut` 
   * `transform_up` / `transform_up_mut` 
   
   
   The current API is pretty confusing enough already (see discussion on 
https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/10035) so having redundant 
methods just makes it more confusing
   
   Also, this terminology leaked into the LogicalPlan variants 
`transform_down_with_subqueries_mut` etc in 
https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/9913
   
   
   ### Describe the solution you'd like
   
   
   I would like to deprecate
   
   * `transform_down_mut` 
   * `transform_up_mut` 
   
   And remove the (yet unreleased) logical plan variants 
`transform_down_with_subqueries_mut` and `transform_up_with_subqueries_mut`
   
   ### Describe alternatives you've considered
   
   _No response_
   
   ### Additional context
   
   _No response_


-- 
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]

Reply via email to