erratic-pattern commented on code in PR #10323:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/10323#discussion_r1586795632
##########
datafusion/optimizer/src/unwrap_cast_in_comparison.rs:
##########
@@ -298,19 +306,47 @@ fn is_support_data_type(data_type: &DataType) -> bool {
)
}
+/// Returns true if [UnwrapCastExprRewriter] supports casting this value as a
string
+fn is_supported_string_type(data_type: &DataType) -> bool {
+ matches!(data_type, DataType::Utf8 | DataType::LargeUtf8)
+}
+
+/// Returns true if [UnwrapCastExprRewriter] supports casting this value as a
dictionary
+fn is_supported_dictionary_type(data_type: &DataType) -> bool {
+ matches!(data_type,
+ DataType::Dictionary(_, inner) if is_supported_type(inner))
+}
+
+/// Convert a literal value from one data type to another
fn try_cast_literal_to_type(
lit_value: &ScalarValue,
target_type: &DataType,
-) -> Result<Option<ScalarValue>> {
+) -> Option<ScalarValue> {
let lit_data_type = lit_value.data_type();
- // the rule just support the signed numeric data type now
- if !is_support_data_type(&lit_data_type) ||
!is_support_data_type(target_type) {
- return Ok(None);
+ if !is_supported_type(&lit_data_type) || !is_supported_type(target_type) {
+ return None;
}
if lit_value.is_null() {
// null value can be cast to any type of null value
- return Ok(Some(ScalarValue::try_from(target_type)?));
+ return ScalarValue::try_from(target_type).ok();
Review Comment:
> I wonder if ignoring errors will make tracking down unsupported types
harder (I am imagining when we try and add REEArray or StringViewArray). 🤔
yeah we may want to reintroduce a Result type, but as it stands currently
the errors were already being ignored anyway so they didn't serve any purpose.
also the boolean is_supported_* means that we'll just silently skip those
cases anyway.
so realistically most of those errors just don't ever occur and if they did
occur we wouldn't know about them. we would need to rethink the design of this
code to surface those errors.
another interesting possibility is debug assertions that panic, but only on
'debug' builds. I've always found this to be an interesting but underutilized
tool for uncovering bugs
--
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
