Skip to content

Conversation

@evetion
Copy link

@evetion evetion commented Jul 27, 2023

Fixes #384
Fixes #373

This does fail a number of tests, which we can fix after we agree on the direction of this PR.

@evetion evetion changed the title Drop missing from juliaeltype if ValidityBitmap is all valid. Drop missing from juliaeltype if ValidityBitmap is all valid. Jul 27, 2023
@evetion
Copy link
Author

evetion commented Jul 27, 2023

Fixes #283

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Aug 4, 2023

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 43 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 5.11%. Comparing base (f8d2203) to head (8cb11a7).
⚠️ Report is 44 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/eltypes.jl 0.00% 29 Missing ⚠️
src/table.jl 0.00% 13 Missing ⚠️
src/arraytypes/arraytypes.jl 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (f8d2203) and HEAD (8cb11a7). Click for more details.

HEAD has 6 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (f8d2203) HEAD (8cb11a7)
12 6
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #477       +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   87.50%   5.11%   -82.39%     
==========================================
  Files          26      25        -1     
  Lines        3280    3208       -72     
==========================================
- Hits         2870     164     -2706     
- Misses        410    3044     +2634     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.


Base.size(p::ValidityBitmap) = (p.ℓ,)
nullcount(x::ValidityBitmap) = x.nc
Base.all(x::ValidityBitmap) = x.nc == 0
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't love overloading all here; can we just call this allvalid? I don't think we need to overload anything for this.

f.type.mode,
typeids,
Tuple{(juliaeltype(x, buildmetadata(x), convert) for x in f.children)...},
Tuple{(juliaeltype(x, buildmetadata(x), convert, false) for x in f.children)...},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you help me understand why we hard-code false in a number of places for the allvalid argument? vs. in other places calling all(validity)?

Copy link
Member

@quinnj quinnj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think I'm fine going this direction. I'd like to think a bit on if there may be unintended consequences here, but it seems like it should be strictly an improvement.

@evetion
Copy link
Author

evetion commented Aug 5, 2023

Ok, I will fix the tests 😃

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Nullable fields don't always need Union{Missing, T} Addtional Missing gets injected into Schema

3 participants