[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17444273#comment-17444273
]
Eduardo Ponce edited comment on ARROW-6276 at 11/16/21, 4:57 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Now that Array types support {*}operator[]{*}, should it be used instead of
*GetView()*? If so, then should we substitute all invocations to *GetView()*
and make *GetView()* a private method which serves only as the implementation
of *operator[]*?
was (Author: edponce):
Now that Array types support {*}operator[]{*}, should it be used instead of
*GetView()*? If so, then should we substitute all invocations to *GetView()*
and make *GetView()* a private method which serves as the implementation of
*operator[]*?
> [C++] Add operator[] to some concrete Array implementations?
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARROW-6276
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6276
> Project: Apache Arrow
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: C++
> Reporter: Wes McKinney
> Assignee: Pradeep Garigipati
> Priority: Major
> Labels: good-first-issue, pull-request-available
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> I have occasionally been in situations where I want to pass in e.g.
> {{Int32Array}} or {{BooleanArray}} into a template that also can accept STL
> sequence types like {{std::vector<bool>}} -- in such cases the main API of
> interest is {{[]}}. Would there be interest in aliasing {{operator[]}} to
> return the result of {{GetView}} (or to deprecate {{GetView}} in favor of
> {{operator[]}})?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
