----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#review85536 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/cli/execute.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137114> Let's just change this everywhere to EXIT_SUCCESS but without the comment. src/cli/execute.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137115> s/errMessage/errorMessage/ src/cli/execute.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137118> I'm not convinced the 'errorMessage' is more help here. You're basically saving doing a 'return EXIT_FAILURE;' in each of these if's, which is not a big deal and arguably more explicit and clear. On the other hand, this code was originally meant to be structured so the line that did a 'flags.master.get()' was as close to the line that checked 'flags.master.isSome()' and by moving that code farther away it makes it so a reader has to look harder to confirm that when someone is "dereferencing" 'flags.master' it's indeed safe. src/cli/execute.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137116> This pattern is why we use Option! src/cli/resolve.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137120> s/argv/argv./ src/cli/resolve.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137119> I liked your pattern of doing 'setUsageMessage' immediately after instantiating the class. Any reason not to do that here? src/cli/resolve.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137122> Let's also use this review as an opportunity to do 'EXIT_FAILURE' anyplace we 'return -1' and 'EXIT_SUCCESS' anyplace we 'return 0'. Please do a sweep in every file you've touched and make it so, thanks Marco! src/examples/load_generator_framework.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137123> Another request: let's replace 'exit(1)' with 'return EXIT_FAILURE' here and everywhere else. Likewise 'exit(0)' with 'return EXIT_SUCCESS'. src/examples/load_generator_framework.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137124> I see that you changed some of these 'EXIT()' calls below to be: cerr << flags.usage(message) << endl; return EXIT_FAILURE; But not all of them have been changed, like these ones. I'd like to make things consistent now even if we weren't consistent in the past. src/examples/persistent_volume_framework.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137125> How come this 'usage' isn't getting killed? src/examples/persistent_volume_framework.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137126> Here's another example of an EXIT() that we can change. Note that I don't so much mind: EXIT(EXIT_FAILURE) << flags.usage(load.error()); But let's just be consistent please. src/launcher/executor.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137127> s/[ERROR]// src/local/main.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137106> To capture what we were printing before, this should be: "Usage: " + os::basename(argv[0]).get() << " [...]\n\n" + "Launches an in-memory cluster within a single process."; src/log/tool/benchmark.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137128> Why are we not killing this 'usage'? src/log/tool/initialize.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137129> Why are we not killing this 'usage'? src/log/tool/read.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137130> Please end sentence with period (here and everywhere please). src/usage/main.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/#comment137132> s/ERROR: // - Benjamin Hindman On May 28, 2015, 10:06 a.m., Marco Massenzio wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 28, 2015, 10:06 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Joris Van Remoortere. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2711 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2711 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Jira: MESOS-2711 > > All the main() methods have been refactored to use the > definition of FlagsBase::help flag and FlagsBase::usage(). > > This CL also tries to bring some uniformity to the > use of exit codes: if this is deemed to be worth > making it uniform, we can come up with common > rules and extend the changes here to be compliant. > > This touches a lot of files, but keep scrolling, and you will see a pattern > emerge. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/cli/execute.cpp dbd19e67f56a150f54180ad13e6402842eb68e17 > src/cli/resolve.cpp a99b6094dffc9f7aa44bcf63ad40121e1abb120b > src/examples/load_generator_framework.cpp > be1a3bf5f16bd811cb4039c8f15478183712a426 > src/examples/persistent_volume_framework.cpp > 8a893fcfa3d5d988a88fdeaf0bfc08e0a49b7a65 > src/health-check/main.cpp a4ce742ab8deff1ebd99359112670493fdaeeac3 > src/launcher/executor.cpp de6f1b104a765a8e53934154e78872b03695b24c > src/local/main.cpp a641b9e83862743890597a2981a9419517e7c589 > src/log/tool/benchmark.cpp 01e55115f35d155efbea190b5308b294ba76e7cb > src/log/tool/initialize.cpp ccda7fb1c0f7113f865ec61adee76b2ea6180442 > src/log/tool/read.cpp d14138502f5bc9a725deb83da505765865da017f > src/log/tool/replica.cpp 3985fc7df4f7153ae623589fbdd769ccbae57125 > src/master/main.cpp d5666bc8ee8d7a0f0b8685f76d65dd1f9ac2a280 > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.hpp > c72fb47f60f40cda8d84a10497b9133f83cf018e > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp > 49e983edab598e2ac487bb488fdd12840a9e7dfc > src/slave/main.cpp f762f5b06be74c391cbc336b2da28f8358952ba4 > src/tests/main.cpp e3fff5d60c0468c0d258f2bb301efc1309c071b0 > src/usage/main.cpp 97f55e938dc7678f8331970d8953d09218f70902 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34195/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > **NOTE** this fixes completely the chained changes from 34193 and makes all > the tests pass. > > > Thanks, > > Marco Massenzio > >
