ARROW-11318: [Rust] Support pretty printing timestamp, date, and timestamp types #9263
Conversation
| } | ||
| DataType::Time32(unit) if *unit == TimeUnit::Microsecond => { | ||
| make_string!(array::Time64MicrosecondArray, column, row) | ||
| DataType::Time64(unit) if *unit == TimeUnit::Microsecond => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was actually a bug here -- there is no such type as using Time32 for storing Microseconds -- it is actually Time64 (as can be seen in the Time64MicrosecondArray type below it)
| let array = $column.as_any().downcast_ref::<$array_type>().unwrap(); | ||
|
|
||
| let s = if array.is_null($row) { | ||
| "".to_string() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't nulls be better displayed as "NULL" and add a test for it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think there are tradeoffs between using empty string or some sentinel ("NULL") for display; I don't have a super strong preference though I do think the behavior should be consistent across types
This PR follows the same convention as the rest of this module and uses "" for NULL values: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9263/files#diff-821be3a8a9239cdd12ab2b3c979e174f7b936aa6bfad4b9bc76489b9923cf747R38
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The NULL behavior is included in the tests below (and the empty string is visible)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense to me. I think the "problem" would be when displaying strings, as the empty string is displayed the same way as null, but I agree it is better to keep it consistent.
Co-authored-by: Daniël Heres <[email protected]>
…stamp types
I found this while removing `test::format_batches` (PR to come shortly); The Record batch pretty printing code was printing numbers rather than dates.
Before this PR, when date/time columns were printed they were printed as numbers:
```
[
"+----------+",
"| f |",
"+----------+",
"| 11111111 |",
"| |",
"+----------+",
]
```
After this PR, they are printed (via chrono) as dates:
```
[
"+---------------------+",
"| f |",
"+---------------------+",
"| 1970-05-09 14:25:11 |",
"| |",
"+---------------------+",
]
```
Closes #9263 from alamb/alamb/pretty_print_datetimes
Authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
3 participants
I found this while removing
test::format_batches(PR to come shortly); The Record batch pretty printing code was printing numbers rather than dates.Before this PR, when date/time columns were printed they were printed as numbers:
After this PR, they are printed (via chrono) as dates: