> On Nov. 5, 2015, 1:29 p.m., Bernd Mathiske wrote:
> > src/slave/containerizer/fetcher.cpp, line 254
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39595/diff/1/?file=1104942#file1104942line254>
> >
> >     Why no longer static?
> >     When you bring back static, you can also bring back the old param 
> > alignment.
> 
> Benjamin Bannier wrote:
>     I wanted to enforce internal linkage for the added `SizeAndMtime` which 
> for types would happen by wrapping them in an anonymous namespace. Having a 
> type in an anonymous namespace immediately followed by its only user 
> `fetchSize` which also has internal linkage, but enforced by `static`, seemed 
> wildly inconsistent to me.

With `SizeAndMtime` gone from here I made the functions `static` again.


- Benjamin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/39595/#review105232
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Nov. 6, 2015, 11:04 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/39595/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 6, 2015, 11:04 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Bernd Mathiske, Jan Schlicht, and Till Toenshoff.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3785
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3785
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Also added function to query mtime of HDFS resource.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/hdfs/hdfs.hpp 42c150186f2ce676407e4e00e84bd7e38063d9ba 
>   src/slave/containerizer/fetcher.hpp 
> c7518a36f6344841880dbb11bfce603fd2791fc0 
>   src/slave/containerizer/fetcher.cpp 
> e0d02d5f8f4f6e930a2ae6abe365548af6d1b01f 
>   src/tests/fetcher_cache_tests.cpp 0b3245105b4c1efae54f0bc34f672290819a6f0b 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39595/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin Bannier
> 
>

Reply via email to