-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15319/#review28452
-----------------------------------------------------------
I think these are the semantics one would expect, since I would expect these
two operations to behave the same:
Future<T> f = p->foo();
f.discard(); // Discards the future returned by foo().
Future<T> f = dispatch(p, P::foo);
f.discard(); // Currently, this will not discard the future returned by
// foo(), only discards the dispatch promise's future. Seems weird
to me.
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/dispatch.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/15319/#comment55260>
Can you add a NOTE that the outer Future's discard() may return true
despite the associated Future's discard() returning false?
- Ben Mahler
On Nov. 7, 2013, 7:41 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/15319/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Nov. 7, 2013, 7:41 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Ben Mahler, and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Say you have a process defined as follows:
>
> class FooProcess : public Process<FooProcess>
> {
> public:
> Future<bool> func() { return future; }
> private:
> Future<bool> future;
> };
>
> Then you call dispatch that returns a future:
>
> Future<bool> f = dispatch(process, &FooProcess::func);
>
> If the user discards the future 'f', we expect the 'future' field in
> FooProcess also being discarded. However, this is not the case currently.
>
> This patch fixed this issue.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/dispatch.hpp b337a87
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp 7848599
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/15319/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check
>
> Also:
> 3rdparty/libprocess/tests --gtest_repeat=1000
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jie Yu
>
>
