paleolimbot commented on PR #431:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/431#issuecomment-2067530671
> Users might want to influence how for example a map or interval type is
converted to python)
Right now that's a little awkward, but possible:
```python
imp
jorisvandenbossche commented on PR #431:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/431#issuecomment-2066696388
> The part where the concept of a registry is difficult to avoid (global or
tightly scoped) is when doing conversion to/from Python objects with nested
type support.
paleolimbot commented on PR #431:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/431#issuecomment-2061169372
> Do we want to go the route of a registry and having users define their own?
Great point! I'm still feeling my way through how users should interact with
this.
The
jorisvandenbossche commented on PR #431:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/431#issuecomment-2060747347
(we could of course still provide some more ergonomic access to the
extension name/metadata, e.g. by detecting if those keys are present, and in
that case showing them mo
jorisvandenbossche commented on PR #431:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/431#issuecomment-2060743694
Do we want to go the route of a registry and having users define their own?
For nanoarrow, I would personally stick to what it in essence is: metadata
(and we have
paleolimbot opened a new pull request, #431:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/pull/431
Still a work in progress!
--
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
