alamb commented on code in PR #11989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/11989#discussion_r1723580943
##########
datafusion/physical-plan/src/windows/window_agg_exec.rs:
##########
@@ -33,19 +29,21 @@ use crate::{
ExecutionPlan, ExecutionPlanProperties, PhysicalExpr, PlanProperties,
RecordBatchStream, SendableRecordBatchStream, Statistics, WindowExpr,
};
-
use arrow::array::ArrayRef;
use arrow::compute::{concat, concat_batches};
-use arrow::datatypes::{Schema, SchemaBuilder, SchemaRef};
+use arrow::datatypes::SchemaRef;
use arrow::error::ArrowError;
use arrow::record_batch::RecordBatch;
use datafusion_common::stats::Precision;
use datafusion_common::utils::{evaluate_partition_ranges, transpose};
use datafusion_common::{internal_err, Result};
use datafusion_execution::TaskContext;
use datafusion_physical_expr::PhysicalSortRequirement;
-
use futures::{ready, Stream, StreamExt};
+use std::any::Any;
+use std::pin::Pin;
+use std::sync::Arc;
+use std::task::{Context, Poll};
Review Comment:
Yeah, I agree as well -- if we care about a consistent location / import
order / style of `use` statements, let's get it in some automated tool that can
be run as part of CI rather than try to enforce it manually during code review
I often see PRs that rearrange the imports and I suspect it is some IDE
setting. Having it inconsistent makes merge conflicts more common but otherwise
is not a problem in my mind
--
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]
