mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Schad <jo...@mesosphere.io>
Subject Re: Review Request 44650: Omitted names of unused parameters in executor library.
Date Tue, 15 Mar 2016 11:12:35 GMT


> On March 15, 2016, 3:18 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/exec/exec.cpp, line 206
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44650/diff/3/?file=1297454#file1297454line206>
> >
> >     This doesn't seem like the style we use for unused arguments..?

There are examples for this in the codebase (see openssl.cpp). I guess the Google Styleguide
(https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Function_Declarations_and_Definitions)
states "Unused parameters that are obvious from context may be omitted:" and " Unused parameters
that might not be obvious should comment". So I would agree that in this case it is obvious
and hence could be omited.


- Joerg


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/44650/#review123587
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 14, 2016, 5:45 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/44650/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 14, 2016, 5:45 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Joerg Schad.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/exec/exec.cpp dec7e8814e7151718d1c89381458753f2e22739e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/44650/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> The complete chain was tested. See https://reviews.apache.org/r/44662/.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov
> 
>


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