-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/63933/#review191435
-----------------------------------------------------------



PASS: Mesos patch 63933 was successfully built and tested.

Reviews applied: `['63930', '63931', '63932', '63933']`

All the build artifacts available at: 
http://dcos-win.westus.cloudapp.azure.com/mesos-build/review/63933

- Mesos Reviewbot Windows


On Nov. 17, 2017, 4:03 p.m., Michael Park wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/63933/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 17, 2017, 4:03 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Benjamin Mahler.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> ```
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp:2298:33:
> warning: 'message' used after it was moved [misc-use-after-move]
>       poll_socket.get().connect(message.to.address)
>                                 ^
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp:2299:16: note: move occurred here
>         .onAny(lambda::bind(
>                ^
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp:2298:33: note: the use and move are
> unsequenced, i.e. there is no guarantee about the order in which they
> are evaluated
>       poll_socket.get().connect(message.to.address)
>                                 ^
> ```
> 
> Given an expression like `x.f(a).g(b)`, in C++11/4, there's no guarantee
> that `f(a)` is fully evaluated before `b` is evaluated.
> 
> Either of the following are valid evaluation order:
>   - `a`, `f(a)`, `b`, `g(b)` or
>   - `a`, `b`, `f(a)`, `g(b)`
> 
> More so if there `a` and `b` actually contain subexpressions.
> 
> In C++17, we could rely on this order since it is guaranteed to be:
>   - `a`, `f(a)`, `b`, `g(b)`
> 
> http://eel.is/c++draft/expr.compound#expr.call-5
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp 
> 3942a3ae01e56b76e7b27035e705abdb7e3c4828 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63933/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael Park
> 
>

Reply via email to