thrift-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bud Bundy <bud...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: thrift/concurrency/Mutex.h bug
Date Wed, 07 Nov 2012 16:08:00 GMT
Thanks, I'd hate to patch this myself every release.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-1748

Oh and sorry, I couldn't find "attach" in JIRA, maybe I don't have
permissions, so I had to post the code.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Henrique Mendonça <henrique@apache.org>wrote:

> Hi Bud,
>
> I wonder why we are not using boost mutex and scoped mutex instead but
> those two macros are probably not necessary anyways.
> Would you create a patch and copy/adapt those comments to the thrift Mutex
> classes themselves?
> Thank you!
> http://thrift.apache.org/docs/HowToContribute/
>
> Henrique
>
> On 7 November 2012 00:19, Bud Bundy <budric@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm using version 0.9.0.  The following code in
> thrift/concurrency/Mutex.h
> > is causing me great headaches:
> >
> > // A little hack to prevent someone from trying to do "Guard(m);"
> > // Such a use is invalid because the temporary Guard object is
> > // destroyed at the end of the line, releasing the lock.
> > // Sorry for polluting the global namespace, but I think it's worth it.
> > #define Guard(m) incorrect_use_of_Guard(m)
> > #define RWGuard(m) incorrect_use_of_RWGuard(m)
> >
> > The global macro is interfering with another library I'm using that also
> > defines a Guard class within their own namespace.  So, no, I don't think
> > it's worth it.  I think it's a bug.  I can patch the file by removing
> those
> > two lines, but any way this can be fixed in the trunk?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
>

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