----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34645/#review85137 -----------------------------------------------------------
This is an interesting case. We have a proxy to another function, rather than the implementation of that function as a lambda. I'm curious what the community's view is on using the proxy lambda approach as per your patch, versus a `std::bind`. I think the lambda is more readable, the bind is more explicit about what is going on :-) Depending on the way the community votes, I would add a comment here just stating that this is a proxy lambda. What do you think? src/master/master.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34645/#comment136612> 1) I don't think this will compile. We need to capture `this` rather than `allocator` if we want to access a class member of the member function. 2) We can use `string` here rather than `std::string` since we are in an implementation file that has declared `using std::string` - Joris Van Remoortere On May 24, 2015, 4:53 p.m., haosdent huang wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/34645/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 24, 2015, 4:53 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Joris Van Remoortere. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2670 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2670 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Update existing lambdas to meet style guide > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/master.cpp 1526f59e7c6b135657550eab2ca46216923a01f6 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34645/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > haosdent huang > >
