You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mesos.apache.org by Benjamin Hindman <be...@berkeley.edu> on 2014/01/06 20:40:30 UTC
Review Request 16661: Refactorings necessary for getting clang to compile
C++11 libprocess.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos-git
Description
-------
A test was also added that provides all possible examples of using std::bind and lambda's with process::defer, Future::on* (Ready, Failed, etc) and Future::then.
Diffs
-----
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/defer.hpp PRE-CREATION
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp PRE-CREATION
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/executor.hpp PRE-CREATION
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp 4122b96ed82105f8ddcbae8904281864ca480c82
3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp b0fb5c2401618d83c95b9b87f1f5dc107c4ad466
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/diff/
Testing
-------
make check
Thanks,
Benjamin Hindman
Re: Review Request 16661: Refactorings necessary for getting clang to
compile C++11 libprocess.
Posted by Benjamin Hindman <be...@berkeley.edu>.
> On Jan. 13, 2014, 6:34 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp, line 75
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/diff/1/?file=417597#file417597line75>
> >
> > s/explicitely/explicitly/
You missed the 'implicitly' on the next line! ;)
> On Jan. 13, 2014, 6:34 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp, lines 75-76
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/diff/1/?file=417597#file417597line75>
> >
> > Is this because there is an implicit 'this->' when we're accessing the members?
> >
> > I'm a bit surprised that we'd get a copy of this as opposed to the members, anywhere I can read about this?
Yes, it's because we get an implicit 'this->'.
- Benjamin
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#review31582
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 6, 2014, 7:40 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 6, 2014, 7:40 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> A test was also added that provides all possible examples of using std::bind and lambda's with process::defer, Future::on* (Ready, Failed, etc) and Future::then.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/defer.hpp PRE-CREATION
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp PRE-CREATION
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/executor.hpp PRE-CREATION
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp 4122b96ed82105f8ddcbae8904281864ca480c82
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp b0fb5c2401618d83c95b9b87f1f5dc107c4ad466
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Benjamin Hindman
>
>
Re: Review Request 16661: Refactorings necessary for getting clang to
compile C++11 libprocess.
Posted by Ben Mahler <be...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#review31582
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it!
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/defer.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#comment60299>
It looks like this comment also belongs in c++11/deferred.hpp.
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/defer.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#comment60294>
I need to read about universal references now.. :)
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#comment60282>
s/implicitely/implicitly/
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#comment60284>
s/explicitely/explicitly/
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#comment60287>
Is this because there is an implicit 'this->' when we're accessing the members?
I'm a bit surprised that we'd get a copy of this as opposed to the members, anywhere I can read about this?
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/#comment60095>
A comment would be nice for posterity as to why you needed to add these structs.
Also, a comment on why onDiscarded did not need special handling like onReady/onFailed would be nice.
- Ben Mahler
On Jan. 6, 2014, 7:40 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 6, 2014, 7:40 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> A test was also added that provides all possible examples of using std::bind and lambda's with process::defer, Future::on* (Ready, Failed, etc) and Future::then.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/defer.hpp PRE-CREATION
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/deferred.hpp PRE-CREATION
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/c++11/executor.hpp PRE-CREATION
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp 4122b96ed82105f8ddcbae8904281864ca480c82
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp b0fb5c2401618d83c95b9b87f1f5dc107c4ad466
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16661/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Benjamin Hindman
>
>