Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Code improvements for ETW exporter #519
Code improvements for ETW exporter #519
Changes from all commits
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 filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is this removed ? To accommodate
Propertiesclass ? Just want to ensure that this won't make it error-prone if someone tries to create it's instance with incorrect type.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I removed it, adding an explanation of why exactly. Short answer is that it's a transform into
KeyValueIterablewhereValue = common::AtributeValue, but the original containerT- may have wider typing system! Its own value may be an extension over the basic set of OTLP types. That containerTthen transforms the values to use onlycommon::AttributeValuetype of values. This is the original comment on top of this template:I would like to extend this template later on, by moving
PropertiesfromETWexporter into common helper class that lives in API includes. That way we can support ANY type on API surface, and the helper would transform-convert the types into propercommon::AttributeValue. It's a handy pattern that would be immensely helpful forbyte arrays, forUUID/GUID, and practically for any other usefulValueType. As long as container provides a transform. For example, that container may transformGUIDto string. Orbyte arraytobase64 string. Or converttime_tor any sort of othertimespecorticksstructure touint64_t, for example. Devs may follow this pattern to bridge / shim other SDKs and APIs to normalized view within the confines of OpenTelemetry typing system.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This should be safe. The actual contract is captured in the signature of
ForEachKeyValue.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a long name, but let's use
NullSpanContextKeyValueIterable. To be consistent withSpanContextKeyValueIterable.NullSpanContextis ambiguous.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Anyway, to avoid an additional class, one could also do this:
using SpanContextKeyValueIterableInitializerList = SpanContextKeyValueIterableView<std::initializer_list< std::pair<SpanContext, std::initializer_list<std::pair<nostd::string_view, common::AttributeValue>>>>>;And then define your additional
StartSpanmethod like this:Just to avoid a clutter of types that we also need to document (and that are error-prone, e. g. return
falsein case of success). We also haveNullKeyValueIterable, however, it's not used anywhere ...There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can refactor this in a separate (unrelated PR) by moving these into separate helper header or something. That would also enable
NullTracerProvidercases, unrelated to ETW per se. Right now it is more or less "internal" detail that I think we can rename / adjust before GA.