Github user clarkyzl commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3389#discussion_r102626945
--- Diff:
flink-libraries/flink-table/src/main/scala/org/apache/flink/table/codegen/calls/ScalarFunctionCallGen.scala
---
@@ -48,10 +48,16 @@ class ScalarFunctionCallGen(
.getOrElse(throw new CodeGenException("No matching signature
found."))
val resultClass = getResultTypeClass(scalarFunction, matchingSignature)
+ // zip for variable signatures
+ var paramToOperands = matchingSignature.zip(operands)
+ var i = paramToOperands.length
+ while (i < operands.length) {
+ paramToOperands = paramToOperands :+ (matchingSignature.head,
operands(i))
--- End diff --
Thanks, @wuchong .Yes. It's a mistake here. And tests haven't covered this
situation. Since the max number of the arguments is 254. I don't think it is
necessary to use a component type at the phase of code generation. I will try
to add some tests to cover this situation.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
