----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#review176149 -----------------------------------------------------------
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 152 (original), 164 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249495> s/unspec/internal/ 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 152-154 (original), 164-166 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249502> Let's leave a comment here explaining that we need an internal Address to capture the common functions reused between both inet::Address and inet6::Address which are both IP based and that we can't do this for the top-level Address because it can potentially hold a unix address which we can't have these overloaded functions apply to. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 207 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249496> s/unspec/internal/ 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 163 (original), 221 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249498> Move static's up to the top of class (THIS WAS MY BUG NOT YOURS SORRY!). 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 223 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249499> Keep using IP/port constructor after net::IP refactor. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 199 (original), 281 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249500> Move '{' to next line. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 200 (original), 282 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249501> Call IP/port constructor after net::IP refactor. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 285 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249503> inet6::Address::ANY_ANY() is explicit enough, so let's kill the extra '6'. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 253 (original), 358 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249506> Weird spacing, probably not your bug but can you fix it! 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 258 (original), 363 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249505> Extra newline. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 377 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249504> Extra newline. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 387 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249507> Pull '{' back to previous line, below too please. 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Lines 402 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249509> s/unspec/internal/ 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp Line 271 (original), 413 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/#comment249508> Compiler won't catch this so just mentioning it for you. - Benjamin Hindman On May 10, 2017, 7:07 a.m., Avinash sridharan wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 10, 2017, 7:07 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Jie Yu. > > > Bugs: MESOS-7488 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7488 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Introduced `inet6::Address` to handle IPv6 addresses in `libprocess`. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp > 6b143c3d00c1d7ebd1697c26b6d312a64f30839a > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/socket.cpp 85920a1abb3a2b2da167647dcf1351b825c72c80 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59129/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check. > > > Thanks, > > Avinash sridharan > >