----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#review87917 -----------------------------------------------------------
Looks good. Besides some style nits, I'd also like you to remove the single-argument join and put the REQUIRE macro into a separate patch. 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140341> Also #include <utility> // std::forward 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140340> Why is this included? I don't think you're actually using enable_if in this file anymore. 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140331> Remove blank line 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140332> Why do we need this single-element join version? Seems like the two-element version would be the sensible base case. 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140333> This can fit on one line (<=80 char), so let's do so. 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140342> Remove tab/indentation please 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140343> Should only indent 2 spaces 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140334> Two blank lines between function implementations, please. 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/require.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140335> This macro is unused in this patch. While it may be valuable, let's split it off into a separate patch to be reviewed separately. Ideally we would introduce the macro along with another patch that actually uses it. 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/path_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140339> Would it be worthwhile to also test: path::join("ab", "/", "/") path::join("/", "", "/ab") 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/path_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/#comment140338> I don't think a single-argument join makes any sense. We didn't support one before, and I would expect such a call to fail at compile-time. Please remove. - Adam B On June 12, 2015, 12:04 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 12, 2015, 12:04 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Adam B and Cody Maloney. > > > Bugs: MESOS-1733 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1733 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This change takes an un-complicated/naive route ( no trimming of values etc ) > at making path::join(...) variadic mainly in order to preserve the earlier > over-loaded join functionality. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/path.hpp > d4df6502d1297ea3ad8e2a1e3bb16ea9d7c7913c > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/require.hpp PRE-CREATION > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/path_tests.cpp > cf354125687e0f60b6d5b105f19d75e4436f21bf > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35179/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check + added some additional tests. > > > Thanks, > > Anand Mazumdar > >
