-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/36167/#review90449
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Adam B


On July 3, 2015, 7:23 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/36167/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 3, 2015, 7:23 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Ben Mahler, and Till Toenshoff.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> While returning an `Option<http::Response>` may lead to object slicing. 
> Currently it is not a problem since descendants of http::Response do not 
> alter the memory mapping of the object, i.e. they don't add new fields. At 
> the same time, every where else the usage is return `Future<http::Response>`.
> 
> In order to keep it consistent the return value of `FirewallRule::apply()` is 
> updated.
> 
> Keep in mind that if object slicing ever happens, this change must be 
> reverted and usage of `Future<http::Response>` should be changed to 
> `Future<http::Response*>`.
> 
> For discussion see [r/35919/](https://reviews.apache.org/r/35919/)
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/firewall.hpp 
> 692e065f2744f38035d81c0137760d996a295df6 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp 
> 883776a6d87f3f14d04e2d574b0e0baa469af579 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36167/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> make distcheck
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rojas
> 
>

Reply via email to