Skip to content

GH-17081: [C++] arrow::stl::TupleRangeFromTable docs incorrect#50095

Merged
pitrou merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom
thisisnic:GH-17081-tuple-docs
Jun 9, 2026
Merged

GH-17081: [C++] arrow::stl::TupleRangeFromTable docs incorrect#50095
pitrou merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom
thisisnic:GH-17081-tuple-docs

Conversation

@thisisnic

@thisisnic thisisnic commented Jun 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Rationale for this change

The documentation example for TupleRangeFromTable was missing the cast_options and ctx parameters, so it didn't match the actual function signature

What changes are included in this PR?

Add them

Are these changes tested?

No

Are there any user-facing changes?

Better docs

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 4, 2026 09:20
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⚠️ GitHub issue #17081 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR fixes the C++ documentation example for arrow::stl::TupleRangeFromTable by adding the missing parameters (arrow::compute::CastOptions and arrow::compute::ExecContext) so the example matches the actual API signature in cpp/src/arrow/stl.h.

Changes:

  • Update the narrative text to mention CastOptions and ExecContext are needed for conversions.
  • Update the code snippet to construct ExecContext / CastOptions and pass them to TupleRangeFromTable.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@thisisnic thisisnic requested a review from pitrou June 8, 2026 10:42

@pitrou pitrou left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

+1, thank you @thisisnic

@pitrou pitrou merged commit 901a6d5 into apache:main Jun 9, 2026
12 checks passed
@pitrou pitrou removed the awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review label Jun 9, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review label Jun 9, 2026
@conbench-apache-arrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 3 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 901a6d5.

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 2 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants