> On April 24, 2013, 8:17 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote: > > third_party/libprocess/third_party/stout/include/stout/proc.hpp, line 33 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10745/diff/1/?file=283953#file283953line33> > > > > This really shouldn't be in the proc namespace, this should be in os. > > The problem is seeing "proc::" in the source code and thinking this > > functionality is only available on Linux where the proc filesystem exists. > > We should kill this file and move alive into os! Feel free to defer after > > the reaper stuff gets committed. > > Vinod Kone wrote: > how about linux::proc for linux specific stuff and proc:: for os agnostic > stuff? i still like us decomposing os.hpp into smaller namespaces. > > Benjamin Hindman wrote: > I'm happy to decouple, but IMHO proc is too well known a name to overload > here.
As I implement OSX process utilities, we will have to consider this. - Ben ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10745/#review19650 ----------------------------------------------------------- On April 24, 2013, 12:31 a.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/10745/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 24, 2013, 12:31 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Vinod Kone, and Ben Mahler. > > > Description > ------- > > See summary. > > > Diffs > ----- > > third_party/libprocess/third_party/stout/include/stout/proc.hpp > 19000eb182cef4ecbf10fc3aa6c6e6c076f1ac46 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10745/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > N/A > > > Thanks, > > Jiang Yan Xu > >
