rluvaton commented on code in PR #21323:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/21323#discussion_r3182295915
##########
datafusion/expr/src/higher_order_function.rs:
##########
@@ -224,35 +224,104 @@ pub struct LambdaArgument {
/// per outer sublist), avoiding the per-call `Schema::new` build that
/// includes constructing the internal name -> index map.
schema: SchemaRef,
+ /// A RecordBatch containing the captured columns inside this lambda body,
if any
+ ///
+ /// For example, for `array_transform([2], v -> v + a + b)`,
+ /// this will be a `RecordBatch` with two columns, `a` and `b`
+ captures: Option<RecordBatch>,
Review Comment:
I thought this was `PhysicalExpr`, but because this is not and also created
every evaluate call, then I don't think you would have a bug with the naming.
I do think that we should try to have `LambdaArgument` in the physical plan
so we won't have to recreate it every batch and have that cost
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
