My vote, as I mentioned on the patch, is option 1. I see MUST_USE(T) as a property of T, like const T or volatile T. I think it is dual to move semantics or to Rust's ability to temporarily or permanently consume values so that /only/ one copy is in use rather than MUST_USE's /at least one/.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substructural_type_system On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Taras Bobrovytsky <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd vote for #2. I think it's better to have less important information > (such as qualifiers) towards the end of lines. (I think it would be nice if > modifiers such as public and private were at the end of method declarations > in Java, for example: void myMethod() private static {...}) > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Daniel Hecht <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As I indicated in the original review, my preference is #2 but I don't feel >> too strongly. >> >> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Tim Armstrong <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi All, >> > I wanted to poll the Impala community for opinions about style for >> > declaring functions where the caller is expected to do something with the >> > return value. >> > >> > Ideally we'd be able to declare Status with an attribute that made this >> > take effect globally, but unfortunately that's not available until C++17. >> > >> > So we need to annotate each Status-returning function. The two >> alternatives >> > we discussed on this CR (https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/4878/) were: >> > >> > #1 - a special macro wrapping Status >> > >> > MUST_USE(Status) DoSomethingThatCanFail(int64_t foo, Bar* bar); >> > >> > Pros: >> > * Closely connected to the return type that it affects >> > * It's easier to search/replace Status with MUST_USE(Status) >> > >> > Cons: >> > * Could get visually noisy if we use it everywhere >> > >> > #2 - a macro that gets appended to the declaration: >> > >> > Status DoSomethingThatCanFail(int64_t foo, Bar* bar) WARN_UNUSED_RESULT; >> > >> > Pros: >> > * Macro is slightly >> > * Less visually noisy since it's at the end of the declaration >> > >> > What do people think? >> > >>
