Skip to content

Conversation

@tadeja
Copy link
Contributor

@tadeja tadeja commented Nov 12, 2025

Issue #48095 and #45322

Rationale for this change

Missing API doc entries.

What changes are included in this PR?

I've added strings for functions and options to the API doc page.

Are these changes tested?

I've built docs locally.

Are there any user-facing changes?

Docs only.

@github-actions
Copy link

⚠️ GitHub issue #48095 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

@apache apache deleted a comment from tadeja Nov 12, 2025
@apache apache deleted a comment from github-actions bot Nov 12, 2025
@tadeja
Copy link
Contributor Author

tadeja commented Nov 12, 2025

I haven’t included arange as docs were not generated for it and I cannot say why yet.

@dangotbanned
Copy link

Thanks @tadeja!

I haven’t included arange as docs were not generated for it and I cannot say why yet.

I think it should have been here:

Factory Functions
-----------------
These functions create new Arrow arrays:
.. autosummary::
:toctree: ../generated/
array
nulls

Which also made me realize that some others in that module are missing too:

@AlenkaF
Copy link
Member

AlenkaF commented Nov 13, 2025

@dangotbanned that should be correct. I would also add infer_type as it seems to be missing too (though it would need a separate section or be in a subsection of Array Types).

@tadeja tadeja force-pushed the 48095_missing_pyarrow_compute_docs branch from fe36e88 to cb4cb70 Compare November 14, 2025 08:52
Copy link
Member

@AlenkaF AlenkaF left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for updating our API docs @tadeja!
I have added minor suggestions otherwise the changes look good. I also checked the rendered pages and found no issues.

Note, the changes in this PR would close two issues:

Maybe the second issue could be linked from the PR description also.

@github-actions github-actions bot added awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review and removed awaiting review Awaiting review labels Nov 14, 2025
@tadeja
Copy link
Contributor Author

tadeja commented Nov 14, 2025

Thanks @AlenkaF, @dangotbanned.
Just note that asarray does not seem to get picked up on the Arrays doc page. I am checking locally if adding it to pyarrow/init.py could do the trick.

@github-actions
Copy link

⚠️ GitHub issue #48095 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

@tadeja tadeja requested review from raulcd and rok as code owners November 14, 2025 11:56
@apache apache deleted a comment from github-actions bot Nov 14, 2025
@apache apache deleted a comment from github-actions bot Nov 14, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

Revision: 56043a1

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-0ec9937bf0

Task Status
preview-docs GitHub Actions

@rok
Copy link
Member

rok commented Nov 14, 2025

@github-actions crossbow submit preview-docs

@github-actions
Copy link

Revision: bd372aa

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-ff8cf53890

Task Status
preview-docs GitHub Actions

Copy link
Member

@AlenkaF AlenkaF left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!!

@tadeja
Copy link
Contributor Author

tadeja commented Nov 17, 2025

@AlenkaF
Note: This PR is now adding asarray to __ init __.py, and making it publicly available where it wasn't so far.

A side note regarding added
index_in_meta_binary and is_in_meta_binary - see older items here (first #29556 then #29839)

@AlenkaF
Copy link
Member

AlenkaF commented Nov 19, 2025

Note: This PR is now adding asarray to __ init __.py, and making it publicly available where it wasn't so far.

Oh, yeah. I seem to remember we have talked about this with Joris in the past. It is a bit confusing for the user to have array and asarray available specially because asarray is a thin wrapper around array(). We might want to keep it as is for now and not add asarray to the API docs.

A side note regarding added
index_in_meta_binary and is_in_meta_binary - see older items here (first #29556 then #29839)

I think #29556 can be closed and we might want to wait for #29839 to be solved before adding index_in_meta_binary and is_in_meta_binary to the API docs?

@AlenkaF
Copy link
Member

AlenkaF commented Nov 19, 2025

Thanks @tadeja!
@raulcd would you mind having a look before I merge?

@tadeja
Copy link
Contributor Author

tadeja commented Nov 19, 2025

@AlenkaF, thank you. So I've removed asarray, index_in_meta_binary and is_in_meta_binary from this PR for now as advised.

@AlenkaF
Copy link
Member

AlenkaF commented Nov 19, 2025

Not sure why the linter job is failing on an unrelated code.

@AlenkaF
Copy link
Member

AlenkaF commented Nov 19, 2025

There is already an open PR for the linter error here: #48173.
It is unrelated to this PR so can be merged after another pair of 👀

@raulcd
Copy link
Member

raulcd commented Nov 19, 2025

I'll try to look at this later today

Copy link
Member

@raulcd raulcd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've gone over the rendered docs and this looks great to me! Thank you very much @tadeja for the work here!

@github-actions github-actions bot added awaiting merge Awaiting merge and removed awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review labels Nov 19, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

⚠️ GitHub issue #48095 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

@AlenkaF AlenkaF merged commit e4b5b11 into apache:main Nov 20, 2025
7 of 8 checks passed
@AlenkaF AlenkaF removed the awaiting merge Awaiting merge label Nov 20, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants