alamb commented on PR #10391: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/10391#issuecomment-2100536570
> @alamb This change is based on what the built-in function does, and what we need for UDAF to have the same behavior. If the change is not clear if it is necessary, we can also change it when moving the function to UDAF gradually. Ah, interesting, I didn't realize this. Sorry I think it would be useful to port UDFs over one by one, and as we find gaps in the APIs we can adjust them Or if we want to discover all the potential issues we could do a WIP PR (as you have done already) to try to move the aggregates and when we hit a block fix the underlying issues in a different PR -- 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...@datafusion.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: github-h...@datafusion.apache.org
