Skip to content

Conversation

@wschin
Copy link
Member

@wschin wschin commented Nov 28, 2018

  1. Remove ISchematized
  2. For any class that requires a Schema, we add a Schema as its field
  3. Rename Schema to OutputSchema in IRowToRowMapper

Fixes #1502.

1. Remove ISchematized
2. For any class that requires a Schema, we add an Schema as its field
3. Rename Schema to OutputSchema in IRowToRowMapper
@wschin wschin self-assigned this Nov 29, 2018
loaderAssemblyName: typeof(RowToRowMapperTransform).Assembly.FullName);
}

public override Schema Schema => _bindings.Schema;
Copy link
Contributor

@TomFinley TomFinley Nov 29, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Schema Schema [](start = 24, length = 13)

We might want to hide this Schema behind an explicit interface implementation, e.g., IDataView.Schema or somesuch, since we don't want to emphasize the fact that this is an IDataView (it eventually will not be). The base class, whatever it is, could have a IDataView.Schema that references a [BestFriend] private protected abstract Schema DataSchema that is overridden here and elsewhere, if appropriate. Then people won't get these identical Schema and OutputSchema in their face, and it also clears the way to more easily deprecate the fact that this is also an IDataTransform in the future. #Resolved

Copy link
Member Author

@wschin wschin Nov 29, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you Tom! In TransformBase (where IDataTransform is inherited), we have

        Schema IDataView.Schema => OutputSchema;
        public abstract Schema OutputSchema { get; }

for hidding IDataView.Schema. Do we still need [BestFriend] private protected abstract Schema DataSchema?


In reply to: 237585047 [](ancestors = 237585047)

@Ivanidzo4ka
Copy link
Contributor

Ivanidzo4ka commented Nov 30, 2018

You have changes in libmf submodule, is it necessary? #Resolved

@wschin
Copy link
Member Author

wschin commented Nov 30, 2018

It's not! It's my turn making this mistake. Let me fix it.


In reply to: 443316147 [](ancestors = 443316147)

Copy link
Contributor

@TomFinley TomFinley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for getting rid of this @wschin !

@wschin
Copy link
Member Author

wschin commented Nov 30, 2018

Fixing this problem is difficult because git automatically fetches the latest commit for the tracked branch. If you don't mind, let's just keep these changes.
[Update] It turnes out that it's a bug on Github. If you check the build log, we're still using the correct commit.


In reply to: 443316482 [](ancestors = 443316482,443316147)

Copy link
Contributor

@Ivanidzo4ka Ivanidzo4ka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:shipit:

@wschin wschin merged commit cb37c7e into dotnet:master Nov 30, 2018
@wschin wschin deleted the extinguish-i-schematized branch November 30, 2018 22:06
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 26, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants