You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@crunch.apache.org by "Champion,Mac" <Ma...@Cerner.com> on 2015/03/27 16:06:54 UTC

MemPipeline's emptyPTable method returns a MemTable

Over the past couple of days I have been reworking some code to get rid of null and pass around EmptyPTable instead, when I broke a few tests. After some investigation, I found that an “instanceof EmptyPTable” check wasn’t triggering because the MemPipeline I was using for tests was building an empty MemTable when emptyPTable was called instead of what I (mistakenly?) expected would be an EmptyPTable.

Is this intentional, or something that was overlooked?

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any included attachments are from Cerner Corporation and are intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this message is confidential and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error by e-mail or you may call Cerner's corporate offices in Kansas City, Missouri, U.S.A at (+1) (816)221-1024.

Re: MemPipeline's emptyPTable method returns a MemTable

Posted by Josh Wills <jo...@gmail.com>.
It was intentional- I'd prefer using the getSize method to check for
emptiness in an implementation independent way.
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:11 AM Champion,Mac <Ma...@cerner.com>
wrote:

>  Over the past couple of days I have been reworking some code to get rid
> of null and pass around EmptyPTable instead, when I broke a few tests.
> After some investigation, I found that an “instanceof EmptyPTable” check
> wasn’t triggering because the MemPipeline I was using for tests was
> building an empty MemTable when emptyPTable was called instead of what I
> (mistakenly?) expected would be an EmptyPTable.
>
>  Is this intentional, or something that was overlooked?
>
>  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any included attachments are from
> Cerner Corporation and are intended only for the addressee. The information
> contained in this message is confidential and may constitute inside or
> non-public information under international, federal, or state securities
> laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of
> such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not
> the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of
> the delivery error by e-mail or you may call Cerner's corporate offices in
> Kansas City, Missouri, U.S.A at (+1) (816)221-1024.
>