Re: Review Request 65840: Windows: Fixed remaining W* macros in `windows.hpp`.

[Andrew Schwartzmeyer <an...@schwartzmeyer.com>]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/65840/#review198421
-----------------------------------------------------------




3rdparty/stout/include/stout/windows.hpp
Line 367 (original), 367 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65840/#comment278560>

    This seems to contradict the statement above that `-1` is a valid exit code on Windows.


- Andrew Schwartzmeyer


On Feb. 28, 2018, 10:10 a.m., Akash Gupta wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/65840/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 28, 2018, 10:10 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Andrew Schwartzmeyer and Joseph Wu.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The `WIFEXITED` and `WIFSIGNALED` were incorrectly checking if the
> exit code was not -1 to determine if the process exited or was signaled.
> However, -1 is a valid return code on Windows, so places in the Mesos
> codebase that called `CHECK(WIFEXITED(status)|| WIFSIGNALED(status))`
> would end up aborting the agent or executor.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/stout/include/stout/windows.hpp b35e6b94ba6709254450be9429b6f48f2d276689 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65840/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Akash Gupta
> 
>