We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
flatten
per #13706 the list functions are modeled after DuckDB1
per https://duckdb.org/docs/sql/functions/list.html#flattenlist_of_lists, flatten should flatten one level, not recursive
query ??? select flatten(arrow_cast(make_array([[1.1]], [[2.2]], [[3.3], [4.4]]), 'LargeList(LargeList(LargeList(Float64)))')); ---- [1.1, 2.2, 3.3, 4.4]
query ??? select flatten(arrow_cast(make_array([[1.1]], [[2.2]], [[3.3], [4.4]]), 'LargeList(LargeList(LargeList(Float64)))')); ---- [[1.1], [2.2], [3.3], [4.4]]
No response
i would prefer a more established point of reference with close alignment to the SQL standard, but this issue is not about this ↩
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I want to work on this but saw a related work in the #13756 should I wait or simply convert flattern func to flatten one level instead of recursion?
Sorry, something went wrong.
You don't need to wait, but you can. We should expect some conflicts, someone will have to resolve.
No branches or pull requests
Describe the bug
per #13706 the list functions are modeled after DuckDB1
per https://duckdb.org/docs/sql/functions/list.html#flattenlist_of_lists,
flatten
should flatten one level, not recursiveTo Reproduce
Expected behavior
Additional context
No response
Footnotes
i would prefer a more established point of reference with close alignment to the SQL standard, but this issue is not about this ↩
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: