mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Park" <mcyp...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 37714: Updated Multimap and multihashmap so their signatures resemble that of hashmap and hashset.
Date Wed, 09 Sep 2015 23:46:01 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#review98293
-----------------------------------------------------------



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (line 28)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154641>

    Not yours, but `s/std::multimap/std::unordered_multimap/`.



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (line 55)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154645>

    `s/other/multimap/` -- here and below



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (lines 60 - 62)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154647>

    Looks like this fits in one line?



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (lines 84 - 86)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154652>

    Looks like this fits in one line?



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (lines 96 - 97)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154657>

    `s/std::make_pair(key, value)/{key, value}/`



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (lines 107 - 117)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154659>

    Can we just `auto` all of this away?
    
    ```
    auto range =
      std::unordered_multimap<Key, Value, Hash, Equal>::equal_range(key);
    for (auto it = range.first; it != range.second; ++it) {
      values.push_back(it->second);
    }
    ```



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp (lines 146 - 159)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154663>

    Let's also use `auto` here similar to the above suggestion?



3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multimap.hpp (lines 34 - 37)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/#comment154665>

    Can I ask why we want these? Presumably the purpose of these classes are to eliminate
the need for their `std::` counterparts.
    
    If we look at a class like `Set`, it inherits from `std::set` but doesn't construct off
of `std::set`. Similarly, `hashmap` inherits from `std::unordered_map`, but doesn't construct
off of `std::unordered_map`.


- Michael Park


On Aug. 28, 2015, 8:11 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 28, 2015, 8:11 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Joerg Schad, Michael Park, and Jan Schlicht.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2924
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2924
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Adds extra template parameters to `multihashmap` which offer control over the hash function
to use as well as the equality operator.
> 
> Implements initializer_list, copy and move constructors for both, `multihashmap` and
`Multimap` in a similar way as it was done for `hashmap` and `hashset`.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multihashmap.hpp d9e4031cee64e48ad50541c04ca11e7861d0a17c

>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/multimap.hpp fb3e7a1d0377001389980302342813217f49cf5f

>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/multimap_tests.cpp 535cd2d10e3074c86c149ce85b205e73ca42ddd3

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37714/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rojas
> 
>


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