> On March 26, 2015, 4:32 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp, line 6 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30032/diff/4/?file=834184#file834184line6> > > > > One thing captures my attention is how we include C headers. AFAIK, the > > standard requires to include them like > > ``` > > #include <ctime> > > #include <climits> > > #include <cstdio> > > ``` > > and so on. > > > > Could you please create a cleanup newbie JIRA for this? > > Alexander Rojas wrote: > Not very sure about that, what it does by using the c… versions of the > headers is to put its functions in the std namespace. Check the C++11 > Standard annex *D.6 C standard library headers*: > > > 2 Every C header, each of which has a name of the form name.h, behaves > as if each name placed in the standard library namespace by the corresponding > cname header is placed within the global namespace scope. It is unspecified > whether these names are first declared or defined within namespace scope > (3.3.6) of the namespace std and are then injected into the global namespace > scope by explicit using-declarations (7.3.3). > > > > 3 Example: The header <cstdlib> assuredly provides its declarations and > definitions within the namespace std. It may also provide these names within > the global namespace. The header <stdlib.h> assuredly provides the same > declarations and definitions within the global namespace, much as in the C > Standard. It may also provide these names within the namespace std. —end > example. > > > As it reads, using functions from the `cname` versions of the `name.h` > headers, may or may not (stdlib implementation specific) require to add the > namespace std too all functions and structs provided by the header.
Seems we got three options here; - start using the C++ wrappers and allowed for a smooth transition (file by file as needed/touched) - - not sure what the implications here are from an optimizing (linker) point of view - global cleanup and `std` namespace added everywhere - stick with the C variants May be worth a dev-list discussion? - Till ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/30032/#review77914 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 26, 2015, 9:53 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/30032/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 26, 2015, 9:53 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Bernd Mathiske, Joerg Schad, > Michael Park, and Till Toenshoff. > > > Bugs: mesos-708 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/mesos-708 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > When serving a static file, libprocess returns the header `Last-Modified` > which is used by browsers to control Cache. > When a http request arrives containing the header `If-Modified-Since`, a > response `304 Not Modified` is returned if the date in the request and the > modification time (as returned by doing `stat` in the file) coincide. > Unit tests added. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/http.hpp 9cf05ac > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp 67b6b3b > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp 3bbfe0a > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/30032/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Alexander Rojas > >
