-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
ARROW-14100: [C++] subtract(duration, duration) -> duration kernel #12141
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add tests with valid values.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you mean like these?
I'd like to enable cases like subtract(duration[ms], duration[us]) -> duration[us]. I'll ping when it's done.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, this now covers cases like subtract(duration[ms], duration[us]) -> duration[us].
b6ce245 to
9526cf6
Compare
|
Sorry for the push. Had to rebase. |
|
Ha, there are conflicts again :-) |
It's the overhead price of distributed review chunks :) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add tests for overflowing inputs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added. However it seems as it duration is not treated as int64_t here and overflow is not detected?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Never mind. I was using the wrong operator.
a68f285 to
f2c4b16
Compare
pitrou
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1, thank you. I'll just wait for the AppVeyor build to run again.
|
Thanks for the review @pitrou. The appveyor issue seems related to the substrait parser. Maybe a rebase will help. |
|
Benchmark runs are scheduled for baseline = 1b9e76c and contender = d97640c. d97640c is a master commit associated with this PR. Results will be available as each benchmark for each run completes. |
ARROW-14100