Skip to content

Conversation

@rxin
Copy link
Contributor

@rxin rxin commented Dec 31, 2014

As we learned in #3580, not explicitly typing implicit functions can lead to compiler bugs and potentially unexpected runtime behavior.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Dec 31, 2014

Test build #24966 has started for PR 3859 at commit 30c2c24.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

rxin added a commit to rxin/spark that referenced this pull request Dec 31, 2014
This is a follow up PR for rest of Spark (outside Spark SQL).

The original PR for Spark SQL can be found at apache#3859
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Dec 31, 2014

Test build #24966 has finished for PR 3859 at commit 30c2c24.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/24966/
Test PASSed.

@marmbrus
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@rxin
Copy link
Contributor Author

rxin commented Dec 31, 2014

Merging in master. Thanks.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in c88a3d7 Dec 31, 2014
@rxin rxin deleted the sql-implicits branch January 1, 2015 00:42
asfgit pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2015
As we learned in #3580, not explicitly typing implicit functions can lead to compiler bugs and potentially unexpected runtime behavior.

This is a follow up PR for rest of Spark (outside Spark SQL). The original PR for Spark SQL can be found at #3859

Author: Reynold Xin <[email protected]>

Closes #3860 from rxin/implicit and squashes the following commits:

73702f9 [Reynold Xin] [SPARK-5038] Add explicit return type for implicit functions.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants