kevinjqliu commented on issue #502: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/502#issuecomment-1983846568
oh wow, thanks @HonahX. I didn't think to pass the properties dictionary as kwargs. > Do you think the above way is good enough or the ** thing is still not very intuitive for users? I feel like its hard to make the connection from dictionary to kwargs. And having the ability to pass the dictionary feels more intuitive. #503 makes it possible to pass in a dictionary to `set_properties`. > If we finally choose to change the input parameter to dict, shall we also do the same for catalog? I'd +1 that change. We might have to support both dictionary and kwargs to keep it backwards compatible, similar to #503 > if most of the properties have special characters in them so that they must be passed in as dictionary key values anyways, wouldn't it feel more straightforward for the users if we defined properties as a dictionary type in the first place? +1 -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@iceberg.apache.org
