On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Benjamin Hindman <[email protected]> wrote:
> What's the rush on committing this? Let's make sure all of the committers > get a chance to share their opinion on this please. > This was assuming that most people would agree on the change. However, if that's not the case, then there is no hurry :-). > I for one would love to hear from others that have used #pragma once in > practice and hear any pros/cons from them. > > Also, while the > > to >> change was meant to preserve some information, > I'm not convinced that there is any information to preserve by replacing > all include guards with #pragma once, and otherwise I feel like we're going > to get just as many reviews where people have to tell you to switch to > #pragma once rather than appropriately name the include guard. > Good point. In this case, we can just do a mass update (if we agree to the change). > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Kapil Arya <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > This issue came up on several occasions. Since people seem to agree on > > using "#pragma once" instead of "#define" guards that we have using, I > > wanted to send a quick email to gather some consensus around it. If > > everyone agrees about the switch, we can update the style guide and start > > using "#pragma once". > > > > The issue is tracked at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2211 > > and there is a review request at https://reviews.apache.org/r/30100/. > > > > Please note that this won't be a mass update. We should keep updating the > > files that are created/updated (similar in spirit to "> >" to ">>" > change). > > > > If there are any concerns, please let us know. We would very much like to > > commit this by tomorrow and any feedback before that is highly > appreciated. > > > > Best, > > Kapil > > >
