pyarrow: Small code simplifications - #9594
Merged
Merged
Conversation
- use `.call_method0(M)?` instead of `.getattr(M)?.call0()` - Use `.extract()` that allows more advanced features like directly extracting tuple elements - remove temporary variables just before returning - use &raw const and &raw mut pointers instead of casting and addr_of!
Tpt
marked this pull request as ready for review
March 20, 2026 17:28
alamb
approved these changes
Mar 27, 2026
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like a nice cleanup to me -- thank you @Tpt
FYI @kylebarron in case you would also like a chance to review
| let capsule = value.getattr("__arrow_c_schema__")?.call0()?; | ||
| let capsule = capsule.cast::<PyCapsule>()?; | ||
| validate_pycapsule(capsule, "arrow_schema")?; | ||
| let capsule = value.call_method0("__arrow_c_schema__")?.extract()?; |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
looks like the corret usecase: https://docs.rs/pyo3/latest/pyo3/prelude/trait.PyAnyMethods.html#tymethod.call_method0
kylebarron
approved these changes
Mar 28, 2026
kylebarron
left a comment
kylebarron
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems fine. I didn't know about &raw mut and &raw const
Comment on lines
-278
to
-282
| if !tuple.is_instance_of::<PyTuple>() { | ||
| return Err(PyTypeError::new_err( | ||
| "Expected __arrow_c_array__ to return a tuple.", | ||
| )); | ||
| } |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fwiw previously there was a nice user-facing error here, while now the error generated from extract will be much more obtuse. Ideally this exception will never be raised except if the producer doesn't follow the spec correctly.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will make a follow on PR to keep the message
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Contributor
|
Thanks again @Tpt and @kylebarron |
alamb
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2026
# Which issue does this PR close? - Follow on to #9594 # Rationale for this change @kylebarron says #9594 (comment): > fwiw previously there was a nice user-facing error here, while now the error generated from extract will be much more obtuse. Ideally this exception will never be raised except if the producer doesn't follow the spec correctly. # What changes are included in this PR? Restore the nice error # Are these changes tested? yes, added a test # Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please call them out. -->
Rich-T-kid
pushed a commit
to Rich-T-kid/arrow-rs
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2026
# Rationale for this change Makes the code simpler and more readable by relying on new PyO3 and Rust features. No behavior should have changed outside of an error message if `__arrow_c_array__` does not return a tuple # What changes are included in this PR? - use `.call_method0(M)?` instead of `.getattr(M)?.call0()` - Use `.extract()` that allows more advanced features like directly extracting tuple elements - remove temporary variables just before returning - use &raw const and &raw mut pointers instead of casting and addr_of!
Rich-T-kid
pushed a commit
to Rich-T-kid/arrow-rs
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2026
# Which issue does this PR close? - Follow on to apache#9594 # Rationale for this change @kylebarron says apache#9594 (comment): > fwiw previously there was a nice user-facing error here, while now the error generated from extract will be much more obtuse. Ideally this exception will never be raised except if the producer doesn't follow the spec correctly. # What changes are included in this PR? Restore the nice error # Are these changes tested? yes, added a test # Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please call them out. -->
alamb
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2026
Remove validate_pycapsule: pointer_checked already raises an exception if the capsule type is wrong, and we wrap it into a nicer error Also relies on a trait to associate types with their capsules names Because we wrap the exception (equivalent of `raise X from Y`), the original exception is still there Follow up of #9639 #9594
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale for this change
Makes the code simpler and more readable by relying on new PyO3 and Rust features. No behavior should have changed outside of an error message if
__arrow_c_array__does not return a tupleWhat changes are included in this PR?
.call_method0(M)?instead of.getattr(M)?.call0().extract()that allows more advanced features like directly extracting tuple elements