Enable redundant_field_names clippy lint #261
Merged
+1
−1
Conversation
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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #261 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 76.80% 76.80%
=======================================
Files 133 133
Lines 23284 23284
=======================================
Hits 17884 17884
Misses 5400 5400 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
alamb
approved these changes
May 5, 2021
Contributor
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe there were false positives in other parts of the arrow codebase as well
Contributor
|
Thanks @Dandandan |
unkloud
pushed a commit
to unkloud/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2025
…from partial Spark aggregation (apache#261)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #260
Rationale for this change
This lint doesn't seem to cause warnings in our code. If we have some false positives, we should not put it here but on a more granular (line/code block/module/project) level, so the warnings locally reflect the CI.
I am not sure why it was configured like this, maybe because of some false positives.
What changes are included in this PR?
Remove the "allow" on the lint
Are there any user-facing changes?
No