-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/#review164277
-----------------------------------------------------------




3rdparty/stout/include/Makefile.am (line 68)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/#comment235946>

    I think you need to fix this?



3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/dup.hpp (line 20)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/#comment235948>

    Tiny nits: Should we `#include` `try.hpp` and `unreachable.hpp` also? Also, 
in this case, I thought standard practice was to include `stout/os/int_fd.hpp` 
instead of the platform-specific header? That's what we do everywhere else.



3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/dup.hpp (line 30)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/#comment235947>

    Tiny nit: While this is not wrong _per se_, I think it is probably more 
correct to write `result == -1`.



3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/dup.hpp (line 37)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/#comment235949>

    Tiny, tiny nit: we're prefixing other global-scope functions with `::`. 
Should this one be, too?


- Alex Clemmer


On Feb. 5, 2017, 1:38 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 5, 2017, 1:38 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Daniel Pravat and Joris Van Remoortere.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Introduced an `os::dup` abstraction in stout.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/stout/include/Makefile.am 53d04a9b6c4a0d8b35d3c84ef24d619fdb8a2c82 
>   3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os.hpp 
> ed6fec3ac1c1f9dfb0585178401f4b552822a0a1 
>   3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/dup.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/dup.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/dup.hpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54595/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael Park
> 
>

Reply via email to