> On July 7, 2015, 3:56 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote: > > 1. Agree that this is useful as a utility in libprocess. Not much overhead > > to move it over right? > > 2. It feels like something that could be exposed as a function rather than > > class, maybe a TODO.
OK I realized that doing the aforementioned refactorings is not as simple as moving the file so probably punting it is the right thing to do for now. 1. As a generic utility it's probably giong to be SHA instead SHA512. 2. OK SHA512::hash() is already static but I meant if made more generic like SHA(alorightm).hash() then shorthand functions like `sha1()`, `sha512()` is easier to use. - Jiang Yan ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34138/#review90791 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 7, 2015, 12:42 p.m., Ian Downes wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/34138/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 7, 2015, 12:42 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Chi Zhang, Paul Brett, Timothy Chen, and Vinod Kone. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > AppC hash computation. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/Makefile.am e7de0f3d1a5efeaef47d5074defe3b40db94f573 > src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/appc/hash.hpp PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34138/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Ian Downes > >
