-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
Add value tracking to ConstExpr for improved union optimization #47
Add value tracking to ConstExpr for improved union optimization #47
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.
LGTM @gokselk. You can open this PR to upstream as well after addressing my last suggestions.
@@ -62,11 +62,12 @@ pub struct ConstExpr { | |||
/// Does the constant have the same value across all partitions? See | |||
/// struct docs for more details | |||
across_partitions: bool, | |||
value: Option<ScalarValue> | |||
} | |||
|
|||
impl PartialEq for ConstExpr { |
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't we auto-derive PartialEq for ConstantExpr's?
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.
Not possible due to a Rust bug, details here: apache#13196
This reverts commit 3051cd4.
1a81628
to
f737c65
Compare
6cc8259
to
1917c0e
Compare
Merged upstream. |
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #.
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?