GH-48592: [C++] Use starts_with/ends_with methods

[jonahkel]

Rationale for this change

The code previously used StartsWith and EndsWith utility functions. C++ now includes built-in starts_with and ends_with functions, rendering StartsWith and EndsWith unnecessary.

What changes are included in this PR?

All calls of StartsWith and EndsWith are replaces with starts_with and ends_with, respectively. The definition and tests for StartsWith and EndsWith have been deleted.

Are these changes tested?

Yes, all unit tests pass.

Are there any user-facing changes?

No.

• GitHub Issue: [C++] C++20: use starts_with/ends_with methods #48592

[github-actions]

Thanks for opening a pull request!

If this is not a minor PR. Could you open an issue for this pull request on GitHub? https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/new/choose

Opening GitHub issues ahead of time contributes to the Openness of the Apache Arrow project.

Then could you also rename the pull request title in the following format?

GH-${GITHUB_ISSUE_ID}: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

or

MINOR: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

See also:

• Other pull requests
• Contribution Guidelines - Contributing Overview

[jonahkel]

Ready for review.

[lidavidm]

This PR appears to have pulled in several other commits - could you retry the rebase/merge?

[jonahkel]

Sorry, I don't understand the issue. I believe the other commits appear because I fetched from the main repo and rebased my branch after I made the PR. Should I close and re-open the PR?

[lidavidm]

A rebase shouldn't show the other commits in GitHub's UI, but this does. It seems the changes on main were rebased onto this branch, whereas the usual workflow is to rebase this branch onto main. (In particular, because this PR now "changes" all those files from those commits, a dozen committers have been pinged for "review".)

There's no need to re-make this PR, but could you share how the rebase was done?

[lidavidm]

For reference, what I usually do is git pull --rebase=interactive upstream main where upstream is git@github.com:apache/arrow. This requires force-pushing the branch afterwards. (If you prefer not to force-push the branch, then updating the branch via a merge commit is better - GitHub will understand that and won't treat the merge changes as "yours".)

[jonahkel]

Ah, I understand. I indeed mistakenly ran git pull upstream main --rebase on my branch, instead of main on my fork.

[pitrou]

@jonahkel Mmmh, can you perhaps try to re-generate this PR? There are so many non-relevant changes in the PR diff that it's not really possible to review it as is.

[jonahkel]

I apologize, I'll get it fixed.
Would you suggest reverting to before I pulled from the main repo and reimplementing changes?

[pitrou]

Would you suggest reverting to before I pulled from the main repo and reimplementing changes?

If that helps, I would suggest starting from pristine git main and applying your changes as a patch.

[jonahkel]

Here's what I did:

• Pulled the latest changes from upstream to the main branch of my fork.
• Created a new feature branch
• Cherry-picked my commits from my old feature branch
• Reset the head of my old branch to point to the new one
• Force pushed to my old feature branch

Can you let me know if this helped?

[pitrou]

Can you let me know if this helped?

Well, definitely! The diff view is clean now.

[pitrou]

LGTM, thank you @jonahkel !

[pitrou]

@github-actions crossbow submit -g cpp

[github-actions]

Revision: 4a4b9b9

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-b981cde2ee

Task	Status
example-cpp-minimal-build-static
example-cpp-minimal-build-static-system-dependency
example-cpp-tutorial
test-build-cpp-fuzz
test-conda-cpp
test-conda-cpp-valgrind
test-cuda-cpp-ubuntu-22.04-cuda-11.7.1
test-cuda-cpp-ubuntu-24.04-cuda-13.0.2
test-debian-12-cpp-amd64
test-debian-12-cpp-i386
test-debian-experimental-cpp-gcc-15
test-fedora-42-cpp
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-20
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-bundled
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-emscripten
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-no-threading
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-bundled-offline
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-14
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-minimal-with-formats
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-thread-sanitizer

[pitrou]

CI looks good apart from unrelated failure(s), will merge. Thank you for this @jonahkel !

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 3 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 35717a7.

There weren't enough matching historic benchmark results to make a call on whether there were regressions.

The full Conbench report has more details.