tree 26c3ae03752c2839be2f52d985dc9310a5e1ca82
parent fa647c03cb47e442e1183ac2f34716e61b3aa138
author Tim Saucer <timsaucer@gmail.com> 1789576163 -0400
committer Tim Saucer <timsaucer@gmail.com> 1789581270 -0400

docs: correct the table duplicate rule and point at the binding section

Four review nits, all documentation.

The no-shadowing rule was credited to DataFusion. It is not DataFusion's:
a `SchemaProvider` decides for itself whether a duplicate replaces or
refuses, and only the in-memory one a session starts with refuses.
`with_extensions` does not ask — it settles the question during resolve,
which is what buys one rule for every destination and a refusal while a
failure is still free, and which makes a bundle stricter than
`register_table` against a provider that would have replaced. Said once
in the collisions section and pointed at from the field docstring, the
Rust resolver and the test that pins it.

`udtfs` pointed at the two-phase section for a claim whose canonical home
is the binding section this PR added; `functions.md` and
`table-providers.md` already point there.

The `Raises:` entry for a declared table did not mention two declarations
resolving to one, and a rewrap had left "registering a" alone on a line.

The user guide now says what a caller meets: a bundle cannot take a table
name they already used.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>