-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/17090/#review32261
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/17090/#comment60998>

    I am just curious why we need an indirection here (using _Failure)? Can we 
just do:
    
    struct Failure { ... };
    
    template <typename T>
    class Future {
      Future(const Failure& failure);
    }


- Jie Yu


On Jan. 18, 2014, 7:38 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/17090/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2014, 7:38 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Also removes implicit conversion operator in _Failure and adds a constructor 
> for Future which takes a _Failure. This will make it easier to capture rvalue 
> references with C++11.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp 
> 2a5f124456fabfb3f15552536dd9e378c36e94ad 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17090/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin Hindman
> 
>

Reply via email to