----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/#review12235 -----------------------------------------------------------
diff incoming (with post-review!) third_party/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/#comment25969> I decided to keep this after adding the other states so that: 1. The code is more readable IMO, the state we're worried about in this case is that the future is still not ready. The other states are checked to print more information rather than control flow. 2. If the future is in an unknown state, we'll still abort since it's !isReady. 3. Paranoia, if someone adds a state (like benh discussed with Timeout), I'd want this code to fail fast (anything other than isReady will abort). third_party/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/#comment25964> done, added errors for {DISCARDED, PENDING} third_party/libprocess/include/stout/result.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/#comment25967> Nothing follows Result in this case. third_party/libprocess/include/stout/try.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/#comment25970> also changed s/message/error() - Ben Mahler On Oct. 8, 2012, 6:26 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 8, 2012, 6:26 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Vinod Kone. > > > Description > ------- > > See above. > > > Diffs > ----- > > third_party/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp bb0e366 > third_party/libprocess/include/stout/result.hpp f6b92a0 > third_party/libprocess/include/stout/try.hpp e865924 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7185/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Ben Mahler > >
