GH-50438: Add ArrowFormat::DurationArray.new(unit, values)

[Reranko05]

Rationale for this change

Building a duration Arrow array from Ruby objects is convenient.

What changes are included in this PR?

Accept ArrowFormat::DurationArray.new(unit, values).

Are these changes tested?

Yes.

Added tests for:

• initialization
• mixed values with nil
• equality
• sliced arrays

Are there any user-facing changes?

Yes.

• GitHub Issue: [Ruby] Add ArrowFormat::DurationArray.new(unit, values) #50438

[github-actions]

⚠️ GitHub issue #50438 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds Ruby support for constructing ArrowFormat::DurationArray directly from Ruby values by allowing ArrowFormat::DurationArray.new(unit, values), aligning Duration arrays with existing Time32/Time64 array construction patterns.

Changes:

• Add DurationType.try_convert to accept a Symbol unit (or pass through an existing DurationType).
• Add DurationType#pack_template to enable packing Ruby values into the values buffer when building arrays from Ruby objects.
• Add DurationArray.type_class and introduce a dedicated test suite covering initialization, nil handling, equality, and slicing.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
ruby/red-arrow-format/test/test-duration-array.rb	Adds tests for building DurationArray from Ruby values (including nil), equality, and sliced comparisons.
ruby/red-arrow-format/lib/arrow-format/type.rb	Extends DurationType with try_convert (unit symbol support) and pack_template (packing int64 values).
ruby/red-arrow-format/lib/arrow-format/array.rb	Defines DurationArray.type_class so DurationArray.new(unit, values) can resolve unit into a DurationType.

[kou]

+1

[github-actions]

⚠️ GitHub issue #50438 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 4 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 97b8678.

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 11 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.