You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to github@arrow.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2022/05/11 14:32:42 UTC

[GitHub] [arrow] bkietz commented on a diff in pull request #13009: ARROW-602: [C++] Provide iterator access to primitive elements inside an Array

bkietz commented on code in PR #13009:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/13009#discussion_r870385124


##########
cpp/src/arrow/stl_iterator.h:
##########
@@ -128,6 +131,162 @@ class ArrayIterator {
   int64_t index_;
 };
 
+template <typename ArrayType,
+          typename ValueAccessor = detail::DefaultValueAccessor<ArrayType>>
+class ChunkedArrayIterator {
+ public:
+  using value_type = arrow::util::optional<typename ValueAccessor::ValueType>;
+  using difference_type = int64_t;
+  using pointer = value_type*;
+  using reference = value_type&;
+  using iterator_category = std::random_access_iterator_tag;
+
+  // Some algorithms need to default-construct an iterator
+  ChunkedArrayIterator() : chunked_array_(NULLPTR), index_(0) {}
+
+  explicit ChunkedArrayIterator(const ChunkedArray& chunked_array, int64_t index = 0)
+      : chunked_array_(&chunked_array), index_(index) {
+    if (index_ != chunked_array.length()) {
+      auto chunk_location = GetChunkLocation(this->index_);
+      current_array_iterator_ = ArrayIterator<ArrayType>(
+          arrow::internal::checked_cast<const ArrayType&>(
+              *chunked_array_->chunk(static_cast<int>(chunk_location.chunk_index))),
+          chunk_location.index_in_chunk);
+    } else {
+      current_array_iterator_ = {};
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Value access
+  value_type operator*() const { return *current_array_iterator_; }
+
+  value_type operator[](difference_type n) const {
+    auto chunk_location = GetChunkLocation(index_ + n);
+    ArrayIterator<ArrayType> target_iterator{
+        arrow::internal::checked_cast<const ArrayType&>(
+            *chunked_array_->chunk(static_cast<int>(chunk_location.chunk_index)))};
+    return target_iterator[chunk_location.index_in_chunk];
+  }
+
+  int64_t index() const { return index_; }
+
+  // Forward / backward
+  ChunkedArrayIterator& operator++() {
+    (*this) += 1;
+    return *this;
+  }
+  ChunkedArrayIterator& operator--() {
+    (*this) -= 1;
+    return *this;
+  }
+
+  ChunkedArrayIterator operator++(int) {
+    ChunkedArrayIterator tmp(*this);
+    ++*this;
+    return tmp;
+  }
+  ChunkedArrayIterator operator--(int) {
+    ChunkedArrayIterator tmp(*this);
+    --*this;
+    return tmp;
+  }
+
+  // Arithmetic
+  difference_type operator-(const ChunkedArrayIterator& other) const {
+    return index_ - other.index_;
+  }
+  ChunkedArrayIterator operator+(difference_type n) const {
+    return ChunkedArrayIterator(*chunked_array_, index_ + n);
+  }
+  ChunkedArrayIterator operator-(difference_type n) const {
+    return ChunkedArrayIterator(*chunked_array_, index_ - n);
+  }
+  friend inline ChunkedArrayIterator operator+(difference_type diff,
+                                               const ChunkedArrayIterator& other) {
+    return ChunkedArrayIterator(*other.chunked_array_, diff + other.index_);
+  }
+  friend inline ChunkedArrayIterator operator-(difference_type diff,
+                                               const ChunkedArrayIterator& other) {
+    return ChunkedArrayIterator(*other.chunked_array_, diff - other.index_);
+  }
+  ChunkedArrayIterator& operator+=(difference_type n) {
+    index_ += n;
+    if (index_ != chunked_array_->length()) {

Review Comment:
   Personally, my preference is to maximize the similarity of any random access iterators to indices/non-owning pointers. In this case I'd try to avoid accessing elements at all when incrementing the iterator, deferring the resolution of `current_array_iterator_` until something is actually dereferenced. This would also move out-of-bounds/invalid current array checking into the dereferencing member functions where correct behavior is far more obvious.
   
   The specific question of how to validate out-of-bounds iterators becomes easier to answer too: We can construct an iterator with whatever index and compare/increment/etc without worry since that operates only on the index.



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org