Proposal: improve SchemaBuilder for "update fields" usecase #6576
Conversation
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
tustvold
reviewed
Oct 16, 2024
Comment on lines
+162
to
+164
| /// consume the builder and return the final [`Schema`] | ||
| /// | ||
| /// (synonym for [`Self::finish`] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| /// consume the builder and return the final [`Schema`] | |
| /// | |
| /// (synonym for [`Self::finish`] | |
| /// Consume this [`SchemaBuilder`] yielding the final [`Schema`] | |
| /// | |
| /// Synonym for [`Self::finish`] |
| @@ -45,6 +71,18 @@ impl SchemaBuilder { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| /// Clears any fields currently in this builder. | |||
| pub fn clear_fields(mut self) -> Self { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| pub fn clear_fields(mut self) -> Self { | |
| pub fn clear(mut self) -> Self { |
I can see the desire to distinguish this from metadata, but given the other fields aren't push_field, etc... Maybe this is more consistent?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// Appends a new field to this [`SchemaBuilder`] and returns self | ||
| pub fn with_field(mut self, field: impl Into<FieldRef>) -> Self { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should there be a with_metadata as well?
Comment on lines
+47
to
+50
| /// let projected_schema = SchemaBuilder::from(&schema) | ||
| /// .clear_fields() | ||
| /// .with_field(schema.field(1).clone()) | ||
| /// .build(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| /// let projected_schema = SchemaBuilder::from(&schema) | |
| /// .clear_fields() | |
| /// .with_field(schema.field(1).clone()) | |
| /// .build(); | |
| /// let projected_schema = SchemaBuilder::from(schema.metadata()) | |
| /// .with_field(schema.field(1).clone()) | |
| /// .build(); |
I wonder if we could make this work, it might be a bit cleaner?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree -- will give it a try
|
FYI @wiedld |
|
I plan to return to this PR later in this week |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #6575
Rationale for this change
See #6575 -- tldr is that it is very easy to forget to copy schema metadata when creating new schemas
What changes are included in this PR?
SchemaBuilderSchemaBuilderclear_fieldsandwith_fieldandbuildfor a more builder like experienceAre there any user-facing changes?
Yes new APIs and docs