> On Sept. 20, 2014, 2:24 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote: > > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/process_reference.hpp, line 9 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/25868/diff/1/?file=698470#file698470line9> > > > > i wonder if we can still need this at all. would just having a > > std::shared_ptr<SomeProcess> cover the use-cases?
I looked at this before moving it out. std::shared_ptr<> is meants to act in an RAII fashion, with the option to define special destructor (0 ref count) behavior. In the case of ProcessReference there seems to be specific management going on around termination of processes. for example a spin loop waiting for a 0 ref count. Right now I am trying to clean up / refactor things out of process.cpp in small patches in order to simplify my proposal for MESOS-1330. I can revisit whether we can replace this with shared_ptr once I have isolated the event management system. - Joris ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/25868/#review54077 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 20, 2014, 12:58 a.m., Joris Van Remoortere wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/25868/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 20, 2014, 12:58 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Niklas Nielsen. > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Move class ProcessReference out of process.cpp and into its own header. > Part of refactoring process.cpp. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/Makefile.am 542ae1c > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/process_reference.hpp PRE-CREATION > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp 8adc809 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/25868/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check in 3rdparty/libprocess > support/mesos-style.py > > > Thanks, > > Joris Van Remoortere > >
