wgtmac commented on PR #1065:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/1065#issuecomment-6763174859

   Sorry for the churn. My earlier comment on this PR 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/1065#discussion_r4434023022 pointed 
you toward #1062, before I posted my concerns about that approach 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/1062#issuecomment-6651676225. That 
sent the implementation in the wrong direction.
   
   I've rebased the branch and simplified the reader:
   
   - Removed the physical-schema copying from #1062. I'll handle the 
list/large-list layout contract separately.
   - Reused the existing `Binder` and `Evaluator`, without a dedicated residual 
binder, residual schema, or row-position mapping layer.
   - Kept residual binding against the caller's read/projection schema, rather 
than the whole table schema. This follows 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/956#discussion_r4095656469 and 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/956#discussion_r4236955015. Java 
similarly passes the read schema to the format reader and residual evaluator.


-- 
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]

Reply via email to