kszucs edited a comment on pull request #1287: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/1287#issuecomment-967708870
> is there any downside in making f = datafusion.functions work on top of import datafusion.functions as f? Not really, it just feels odd for me. If we want to expose the functions as a module then I would stick with `import datafusion.functions`. Otherwise we could also expose all of the functions as staticmethods on a class e.g. `FunctionRegistry` (which would make the rust code simpler perhaps) or we could also expose it as a python object instead of an actual module. If we want to remain backward compatible then we can re-export the `functions` submodule, `column as col` and `literal as lit` symbols. I don't have a strong opinion, so feel free to merge this PR as is - we can discuss it further after the release. -- 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
