davidm-db commented on code in PR #54223: URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/54223#discussion_r2853067030
########## sql/api/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/types/ops/EncodeTypeOps.scala: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more + * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with + * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. + * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 + * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with + * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.spark.sql.types.ops + +import org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.encoders.AgnosticEncoder +import org.apache.spark.sql.types.DataType + +/** + * Operations for row encoding and decoding. + * + * PURPOSE: Provides the encoder needed for Dataset[T] operations. The encoder handles + * serialization and deserialization of user objects to/from internal rows. + * + * USAGE CONTEXT - examples of use: + * - RowEncoder.scala - creates encoders for schema fields + * - EncoderUtils.scala - encoder utility functions + * - Spark Connect - client-side encoding + * - Dataset[T] API - all typed dataset operations + * + * @see + * TimeTypeApiOps for reference implementation + * @since 4.1.0 + */ +trait EncodeTypeOps extends TypeApiOps { Review Comment: If this is only concerning ApiOps, I think this might make sense. The idea to separate originates from catalyst's `types/ops` where we anticipate much more logic to be added in the future. Here, at the moment I'm not sure we will need much more logic, so I think you're right. If it turns out in the future that the logic is getting more complex, we can decide to separate into multiple Ops interfaces (as it is at the moment). Was this your thinking? Does it make sense? -- 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]
