chore: enforce clippy lint needless_pass_by_value to datafusion-functions-nested #18839
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
Jefffrey
reviewed
Nov 21, 2025
| fn array_has_dispatch_for_array( | ||
| haystack: ArrayWrapper<'_>, | ||
| fn array_has_dispatch_for_array<'a>( | ||
| haystack: &ArrayWrapper<'a>, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This I find a bit interesting considering ArrayWrapper is already an enum over references 🤔
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
marked ArrayWrapper enum with #[derive(Copy, Clone)]
Comment on lines
+610
to
+611
| string_array: &StringArrType, | ||
| delimiter_array: &DelimiterArrType, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I still find this especially weird since StringArrayType<'a> is implemented for references, so this becomes a && at the callsite?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But since rust performs de-ref coercion implicitly, so it shouldn't be a problem. I had the same question initially, so I went through some sources and ended up learning about it.
[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/28552082
[2] https://users.rust-lang.org/t/double-references-what-they-mean/56668/2
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for checking this. I still find it odd and see it as a false positive by clippy, but I guess its easier to just follow the lint than manually ignoring it 🙁
alamb
approved these changes
Nov 21, 2025
Jefffrey
approved these changes
Nov 22, 2025
logan-keede
pushed a commit
to logan-keede/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 23, 2025
…ions-nested (apache#18839) ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#18835. - Part of apache#18503. ## What changes are included in this PR? enforce clippy lint `needless_pass_by_value` to `datafusion-functions-nested` ## Are these changes tested? yes ## Are there any user-facing changes? no
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 23, 2025
## Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123` indicates that this PR will close issue #123. --> N/A ## Rationale for this change <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> Whilst reviewing some recent PRs (#18839 & #18768) I noticed we have quite a few inner implementation functions that are public for some reason, which give the false impression these are meant to be public APIs (and thus any changes to their signature needs to be restricted). Went through and limited the functions to private where possible to try reduce our public API footprint. ## What changes are included in this PR? <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> Change inner functions in functions & nested-functions crates to be private, away from public. - There are still some that are left public such as some regex ones, because they are used directly in benches ## Are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> Compiler itself. ## Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> Yes, quite a few functions are now private, but I don't think they were meant to be public in the first place. <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. -->
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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?
clippy::needless_pass_by_valuetodatafusion-functions-nested#18835.clippy::needless_pass_by_valuein all datafusion crates #18503.What changes are included in this PR?
enforce clippy lint
needless_pass_by_valuetodatafusion-functions-nestedAre these changes tested?
yes
Are there any user-facing changes?
no