You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I think we should implement mergeType returning I?Date, POSIXct as separate cases. That would for example solve #3506 and could make the solution here clearer.
#6602 highlights difficulty with our current approach of ignoring column class attributes for well-known classes. We already cater for two very common classes (factor and integer64); I see no reason to treat Date, POSIXct any differently.
Solving this would also solve #3506 with more generality. We should also keep #6627 (in particular the linked "join compatibility table") in mind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think we should implement
mergeType
returningI?Date
,POSIXct
as separate cases. That would for example solve #3506 and could make the solution here clearer.Originally posted by @MichaelChirico in #6603 (comment)
#6602 highlights difficulty with our current approach of ignoring column class attributes for well-known classes. We already cater for two very common classes (
factor
andinteger64
); I see no reason to treat Date, POSIXct any differently.Solving this would also solve #3506 with more generality. We should also keep #6627 (in particular the linked "join compatibility table") in mind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: