GH-49689: [R][C++] Parquets do not support list-columns of ordered factors (ordered dictionaries)#49937
Draft
thisisnic wants to merge 5 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Draft
GH-49689: [R][C++] Parquets do not support list-columns of ordered factors (ordered dictionaries)#49937thisisnic wants to merge 5 commits intoapache:mainfrom
thisisnic wants to merge 5 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
|
|
github-actions
Bot
added
Component: R
Component: C++
awaiting committer review
thisisnic
changed the title
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale for this change
Ordered dictionaries inside nested types lose their
orderedflag during construction, becauseDictionaryBuilderdoesn't track it.What changes are included in this PR?
Store the
orderedflag inDictionaryBuilderBaseand pass it through when reconstructing theDictionaryTypeintype()andFinishInternal().Remove the R-side workaround that was patching this for top-level columns only.
Are these changes tested?
Yes
Are there any user-facing changes?
No
AI usage
Written by Claude, reviewed by me and Codex (via roborev). I had Claude create the tests first, to make sure they failed as expected, then had Claude make the fixes and checked the tests passed. I questioned the approach as I went, in terms of whether it should affect any existing usage of this code. I'd appreciate feedback on anywhere I could have been more diligent in checking the AI-generated code so I can improve this in future PRs.