mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joris Van Remoortere" <joris.van.remoort...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 39802: Windows: Implemented `stout/os/windows/ls.hpp`.
Date Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:10:34 GMT


> On Jan. 11, 2016, 12:38 a.m., Joris Van Remoortere wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/ls.hpp, lines 36-42
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39802/diff/3/?file=1128786#file1128786line36>
> >
> >     If this is the only section that is different between the POSIX and windows
version, does it make sense to factor out this size calculation, and leave a common `ls` implementation?
> 
> Alex Clemmer wrote:
>     It might. Lets look at a couple ways of doing this:
>     
>     * Since the main problem is `fpathconf` (which doesn't make much sense on Windows),
we could create a new function, `os::fpathconf` that simply always returns `-1`.
>     * We could create some other function whose job is just to give the size of the `dirent`
struct on a particular platform. But, I don't know what to call it, or where to put it.
>     * Just keep the forked version.
>     
>     I'm not sure if any of these really reaches out to you. For me,  I liked the last
one because I felt it was clearest on both platforms. For example, the `os::fpathconf` approach
will be a lot less clear because it won't be obvious to _anyone_ that we're just returning
-1 all the time, or what the consequences is for the reported dirent struct size on Windows.
The forked dirent-size-function is not elegant, and adds API bloat, and still requires a forked
file, albeit a much smaller one.
>     
>     I don't know, I'm open to other opinions. I think they all have serious downsides.
My second choice is the forked dirent-size-function option, because it doesn't sacrifice code
readability.

How about `os::dirent_size`?


- Joris


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/39802/#review113580
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 11, 2016, 11:59 a.m., Alex Clemmer wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/39802/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 11, 2016, 11:59 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Artem Harutyunyan, Joris Van Remoortere, and Joseph Wu.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Windows: Implemented `stout/os/windows/ls.hpp`.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/ls.hpp fcc6986f1b6355e0f0f7e25a6e428ab878a97ee4

>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/ls.hpp 5b41344ead115d14dcee8c87a63ed647002f9aae

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39802/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex Clemmer
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message