You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to reviews@mesos.apache.org by Neil Conway <ne...@gmail.com> on 2016/01/29 20:42:15 UTC
Review Request 42972: stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality between
pointer value and 0).
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
Repository: mesos
Description
-------
stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0).
Diffs
-----
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
Testing
-------
make check
Thanks,
Neil Conway
Re: Review Request 42972: stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality
between pointer value and 0).
Posted by Anand Mazumdar <ma...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:50 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp, line 624
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/1/?file=1225888#file1225888line624>
> >
> > Not yours: Should we add a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before this statement now?
>
> Neil Conway wrote:
> Is there value in doing that? In principle, we'd need a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before dereferencing _any_ pointer, which seems like it would add a lot of clutter...
Certainly. Especially in places where you are relying on the _invariant_ that the pointer would be non-null. This seems to be the case here.
- Anand
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/#review116993
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m., Neil Conway wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0).
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Neil Conway
>
>
Re: Review Request 42972: stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality
between pointer value and 0).
Posted by Neil Conway <ne...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:50 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp, line 624
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/1/?file=1225888#file1225888line624>
> >
> > Not yours: Should we add a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before this statement now?
>
> Neil Conway wrote:
> Is there value in doing that? In principle, we'd need a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before dereferencing _any_ pointer, which seems like it would add a lot of clutter...
>
> Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> Certainly. Especially in places where you are relying on the _invariant_ that the pointer would be non-null. This seems to be the case here.
Anytime you dereference a pointer, you rely on the invariant that the pointer is non-null. Not sure why this particular place merits special treatment.
- Neil
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/#review116993
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m., Neil Conway wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0).
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Neil Conway
>
>
Re: Review Request 42972: stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality
between pointer value and 0).
Posted by Neil Conway <ne...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:50 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp, line 624
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/1/?file=1225888#file1225888line624>
> >
> > Not yours: Should we add a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before this statement now?
Is there value in doing that? In principle, we'd need a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before dereferencing _any_ pointer, which seems like it would add a lot of clutter...
- Neil
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/#review116993
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m., Neil Conway wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0).
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Neil Conway
>
>
Re: Review Request 42972: stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality
between pointer value and 0).
Posted by Anand Mazumdar <ma...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/#review116993
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it!
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp (line 624)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/#comment178066>
Not yours: Should we add a `CHECK_NOTNULL` before this statement now?
- Anand Mazumdar
On Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m., Neil Conway wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 29, 2016, 7:42 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> stout: Fixed typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0).
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Neil Conway
>
>
Re: Review Request 42972: Fixed a minor bug in stout's Flags package.
Posted by Jie Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/#review117416
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Jie Yu
On Feb. 2, 2016, 1:53 a.m., Neil Conway wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Feb. 2, 2016, 1:53 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Unintended inequality comparison between pointer value and 0.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Neil Conway
>
>
Re: Review Request 42972: Fixed a minor bug in stout's Flags package.
Posted by Neil Conway <ne...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated Feb. 2, 2016, 1:53 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
Changes
-------
Fix commit summary.
Summary (updated)
-----------------
Fixed a minor bug in stout's Flags package.
Repository: mesos
Description (updated)
-------
Unintended inequality comparison between pointer value and 0.
Diffs (updated)
-----
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
Testing
-------
make check
Thanks,
Neil Conway
Re: Review Request 42972: Fixed a typo (unintended inequality between
pointer value and 0) in stout.
Posted by Neil Conway <ne...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated Feb. 1, 2016, 10:08 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
Changes
-------
Fix commit message style
Summary (updated)
-----------------
Fixed a typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0) in stout.
Repository: mesos
Description (updated)
-------
Fixed a typo (unintended inequality between pointer value and 0) in stout.
Diffs (updated)
-----
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/flags/flags.hpp 2a188459465a5203c56d788a74e69d403790c5bf
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42972/diff/
Testing
-------
make check
Thanks,
Neil Conway