Clippy Lints #37
Clippy Lints #37
Conversation
ChrisMacNaughton
left a comment
ChrisMacNaughton
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While I'm generally happy with passing pointers instead of moving values, I'd like to understand the reasoning for these type changes, as well as the additional changes of pointer -> move
|
|
||
| /// Update tmap (trivial map) | ||
| pub fn rados_object_tmap_update(&self, object_name: &str, update: TmapOperation) -> RadosResult<()> { | ||
| pub fn rados_object_tmap_update(&self, object_name: &str, update: &TmapOperation) -> RadosResult<()> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to change from pass by value to a pointer?
|
|
||
| // Perform a compound read operation synchronously | ||
| pub fn rados_perform_read_operations(&self, read_op: ReadOperation) -> RadosResult<()> { | ||
| pub fn rados_perform_read_operations(&self, read_op: &ReadOperation) -> RadosResult<()> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to change from pass by value to a pointer?
| value: &str, | ||
| format: Option<&str>, | ||
| data: Vec<*mut c_char>, | ||
| data: &[*mut c_char], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to change from pass by value to a pointer?
| value: &str, | ||
| format: Option<&str>, | ||
| data: Vec<*mut c_char>, | ||
| data: &[*mut c_char], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to change from pass by value to a pointer?
| value: &str, | ||
| format: Option<&str>, | ||
| data: Vec<*mut c_char>, | ||
| data: &[*mut c_char], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to change from pass by value to a pointer?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pub fn run_command(&self, command: MonCommand) -> Result<String, RadosError> { | ||
| pub fn run_command(&self, command: &MonCommand) -> Result<String, RadosError> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to change from pass by value to a pointer?
|
|
||
| /// Query a ceph pool. | ||
| pub fn osd_pool_get(cluster_handle: &Rados, pool: &str, choice: &PoolOption) -> RadosResult<String> { | ||
| pub fn osd_pool_get(cluster_handle: &Rados, pool: &str, choice: PoolOption) -> RadosResult<String> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unlike the (many) comments about moves vs pointers, the ones in this file are the reverse?
Also fix some double pointers and use rados_buffer_free for ceph heap allocated memory. Prevent mem leaks
|
Yeah all of these changes are clippy suggestions that values weren't consumed by a function so they should be passed by reference or that enum's passed by reference would be more efficient if they were copied. I don't know how true the copy efficiency is because i haven't benchmarked it. |
Xuanwo
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ead7751 to
9b39b74
Compare
|
Hi, @cholcombe973, would you be interested in working on this again? |
|
Yeah I could try a rebase and clippy again to see what happens.
…On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 7:23 AM Xuanwo ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi, @cholcombe973 <https://github.com/cholcombe973>, would you be
interested in working on this again?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#37 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXKUE23AB4IUCB7HTSCEWLZUXA73AVCNFSM6AAAAABNSILQTKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMRWGY3DEMJYG4>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Perfect, thank you so much! I'm so happy you're still here, in this community. |
Warning! Many breaking changes here from clippy suggestions about best practices.