[jira] Commented: (ZOOKEEPER-246) review error code definition in both source and docs
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12658820#action_12658820 ] Hudson commented on ZOOKEEPER-246: -- Integrated in ZooKeeper-trunk #181 (See [http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/181/]) . updating the docs. . review error code definition in both source and docs. (pat via mahadev) > review error code definition in both source and docs > > > Key: ZOOKEEPER-246 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-246 > Project: Zookeeper > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: c client, documentation, java client >Affects Versions: 3.0.0, 3.0.1 >Reporter: Patrick Hunt >Assignee: Patrick Hunt >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.1.0 > > Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-246.patch, ZOOKEEPER-246.patch, > ZOOKEEPER-246.patch > > > A number of users have mentioned that our use of "calculated" values for > error codes makes it very difficult to track error reports from the logs. In > both c/java we have: > int ERROR = 100 > int X_ERROR= ERROR + 1 > int Y_ERROR= ERROR + 2 > etc... > which makes it difficult to grep/search for "101" and find these references. > A number of users have mentioned that having non-calculated values (ie > X_ERROR=101) would make it easier. > I personally find calculated constants like this an anti-pattern. > We should convert these values to non-calculated at a minimum, perhaps even > redefine them as enums if possible. > Also documentation, esp in the c code (the names btw c and java don't match > btw) is lacking. We need to beef up docs in this area. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (ZOOKEEPER-246) review error code definition in both source and docs
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12656137#action_12656137 ] Mahadev konar commented on ZOOKEEPER-246: - comments: - the static create method KeeperException.create(int) has been removed. We need to keep it for b/w compatibility. - also a little bit more doucmentation on APIERROR would help (both c and java) . you can say that all the api errors start from here, all the others are less than this (more explict than just range start). also, mention that this error is not thrown by the server but is just the range start. > review error code definition in both source and docs > > > Key: ZOOKEEPER-246 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-246 > Project: Zookeeper > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: c client, documentation, java client >Affects Versions: 3.0.0, 3.0.1 >Reporter: Patrick Hunt >Assignee: Patrick Hunt >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.1.0 > > Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-246.patch > > > A number of users have mentioned that our use of "calculated" values for > error codes makes it very difficult to track error reports from the logs. In > both c/java we have: > int ERROR = 100 > int X_ERROR= ERROR + 1 > int Y_ERROR= ERROR + 2 > etc... > which makes it difficult to grep/search for "101" and find these references. > A number of users have mentioned that having non-calculated values (ie > X_ERROR=101) would make it easier. > I personally find calculated constants like this an anti-pattern. > We should convert these values to non-calculated at a minimum, perhaps even > redefine them as enums if possible. > Also documentation, esp in the c code (the names btw c and java don't match > btw) is lacking. We need to beef up docs in this area. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
