On 2013/01/30 06:57:14, dimitern wrote:
> On 2013/01/30 04:50:43, wallyworld wrote:
> > Please take a look.
> LGTM, but why did you move UserData out of the RunServerOpts struct?
I don't think he removed it, he just changed its type from a []byte to a
string.
However, if you still want to pass in a []byte, you can't just shove it
in the struct, because that slot now holds a string.
Then again, we shouldn't really be using the struct for
bytes-on-the-wire as the same struct for
passing-parameters-to-the-function. Because of differences like this.
Maybe it means the conversion to string should be done at a higher level
(before passing it into this function). But it does look like the other
conversions are being done at this level.
On 2013/01/30 06:57:14, dimitern wrote:
> On 2013/01/30 04:50:43, wallyworld wrote:
> > Please take a look.
> LGTM, but why did you move UserData out of the RunServerOpts struct?
I don't think he removed it, he just changed its type from a []byte to a
string.
However, if you still want to pass in a []byte, you can't just shove it
in the struct, because that slot now holds a string.
Then again, we shouldn't really be using the struct for parameters- to-the- function. Because of differences like this.
bytes-on-the-wire as the same struct for
passing-
Maybe it means the conversion to string should be done at a higher level
(before passing it into this function). But it does look like the other
conversions are being done at this level.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7221070/