> On Nov. 4, 2015, 1:02 a.m., Michael Hopcroft wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/stat.hpp, line 
> > 40
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39803/diff/2/?file=1113684#file1113684line40>
> >
> >     Might add a comment explaining that when ::stat() returns a value less 
> > than zero the error can only be ENOENT or EINVAL. ENOENT means the path 
> > doesn't exist, so returning false is correct. EINVAL should be impossible, 
> > based on inspection of the code.
> 
> Alex Clemmer wrote:
>     Just so we're all on the same page, let me state my understanding. Unless 
> I'm reading the POSIX spec[1] and the Windows documentation[2], there isn't 
> an error case where we'd want to return true, right? So it's not clear to me 
> that adding a comment actually helps understanding. The argument I can see in 
> favor of adding the comment is that the Windows implementation returns only 
> two types of error codes, which is definitely less meaningful than the POSIX 
> spec, but on balance, if the POSIX spec returns many more error codes (minus 
> the weird Windows use of `EINVAL`), and it's still clear to readers, than 
> maybe that means we don't need the comment.
>     
>     What do you think?
>     
>     
>     [1] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/stat.html
>     [2] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/14h5k7ff.aspx

Marking this as dropped; please open it up again if you see a clear reason we 
would want to have a comment here.


- Alex


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/39803/#review105007
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 5, 2016, 12:12 a.m., Alex Clemmer wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/39803/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 5, 2016, 12:12 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Artem Harutyunyan, Michael Hopcroft, Joris Van 
> Remoortere, and Joseph Wu.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Windows: Implemented stout/os/stat.hpp`.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/Makefile.am 
> b2dea9b93adfa3ea0415a0b5c81a369dd29b6cfe 
>   
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/internal/windows/reparsepoint.hpp
>  PRE-CREATION 
>   
> 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/internal/windows/symlink.hpp 
> PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/stat.hpp 
> 5b38b9af654d7d1c574f0cc573083b66693ced1d 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/windows.hpp 
> d46e262e0fd1c2de36f3bf19d8bd693c23bf58cd 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39803/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check` from autotools on Ubuntu 15.
> `make check` from CMake on OS X 10.10.
> Ran `check` project in VS on Windows 10.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex Clemmer
> 
>

Reply via email to