[ntuple] Add option to preserve BigInt precision for Int64/UInt64 fields - #418
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Member
|
Please check And one can use much simpler syntax when |
undefined-panda
force-pushed
the
rntuple-process-bigint
branch
from
August 14, 2026 13:05
d4a9002 to
4a7fc4a
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks for mentioning that! Javascript is a somewhat ... different language. |
linev
self-requested a review
August 14, 2026 13:28
Member
|
All failures with node 20 are unrelated. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This Pull request:
Changes:
Add
booleanvariable forReaderItemto process big integer values forInt64andUInt64.Fixes:
Process
BigIntfields without losing precision due toNumber()and without interferring withtreeDraw.