-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#review7702
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16951>

    Related to the previous comment, I don't like something called create that 
also truncates.
    
    If the use case is to have a new truncated file, one can simply do:
    
    utils::os::rm(path);
    utils::os::touch(path);
    
    That is, I'd prefer this was the 'touch' abstraction we know and love, 
without the truncate. I would consider the ability to pass a 'bool truncate' 
flag to 'touch', but I'm not sure it's necessary.



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16952>

    We really shouldn't be logging here (and everywhere else in utils, since 
they all return Try or Result).



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16953>

    Shouldn't need this line, just use 'strerror(errno)' on the next line.



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16959>

    Okay, I reneg my previous comment. I think it makes sense to use Result for 
read because there are three possibilities: (1) the data; (2) an error; (3) 
EOF. We can represent EOF as Result::none.



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16954>

    Did you want an 'else if' here? And you should kill this check anyway and 
return a Result::none below where you check if length == 0.



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16961>

    Kill.



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16962>

    s/open file./open " + path



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16960>

    Kill.



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16963>

    What if it's an error? If your intention is that it will never be an error, 
make this a CHECK first before you do a .get().



src/common/utils.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16964>

    Right, here, using Result makes sense (like the read above). Just all the 
other places didn't make sense.



src/slave/slave.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16965>

    s/rea/Try<



src/tests/utils_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/#comment16966>

    UtilsTest should really be a fixture which makes sure the file gets deleted 
even if the test fails (see https://reviews.apache.org/r/4981 for an example).


- Benjamin


On 2012-05-04 00:28:13, Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2012-05-04 00:28:13)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and John Sirois.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> We can now read/write strings to a file.
> 
> Some common utils for working with protobuf objects.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am cd503a8 
>   src/common/protobuf_utils.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/common/utils.hpp 1d81e21 
>   src/slave/slave.cpp 09a8396 
>   src/tests/protobuf_io_tests.cpp 22f37ac 
>   src/tests/utils_tests.cpp 49ec107 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/4899/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod
> 
>

Reply via email to