You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We currently have APIs that accept a null mask and a null count as parameters. Historically, these APIs made sense because the count was loosely coupled to the mask in the sense that it could be omitted and it would be inferred. As of #13372, this is no longer possible and the null count must be known when a column is constructed. Therefore, allowing the null mask and the null count to be provided separately is no longer possible. From an API design perspective, it would make more sense to have them tightly coupled.
Describe the solution you'd like
We should update all APIs involving a mask and count to instead accept the two as a pair (or as a simple POD struct if we prefer) that encodes both. This change would more clearly signal to users that the two must be provided and used together.
Describe alternatives you've considered
None
Additional context
Implementing this would effectively fix #13154, but it would be a breaking change to the existing API rather than adding an overload.
See #13311 (comment) for some of the discussion that originally sparked this idea.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We currently have APIs that accept a null mask and a null count as parameters. Historically, these APIs made sense because the count was loosely coupled to the mask in the sense that it could be omitted and it would be inferred. As of #13372, this is no longer possible and the null count must be known when a column is constructed. Therefore, allowing the null mask and the null count to be provided separately is no longer possible. From an API design perspective, it would make more sense to have them tightly coupled.
Describe the solution you'd like
We should update all APIs involving a mask and count to instead accept the two as a pair (or as a simple POD struct if we prefer) that encodes both. This change would more clearly signal to users that the two must be provided and used together.
Describe alternatives you've considered
None
Additional context
Implementing this would effectively fix #13154, but it would be a breaking change to the existing API rather than adding an overload.
See #13311 (comment) for some of the discussion that originally sparked this idea.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: