Delete term set #2284
Merged
Delete term set #2284
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
trinity-1686a
force-pushed
the
delete-term-set
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4685be8
to
94123d5
Compare
trinity-1686a
force-pushed
the
delete-term-set
branch
from
94123d5
to
7cb0cdf
Compare
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 14, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
Comment on lines
+206
to
+208
| &'a self, | ||
| query: &CacheKey<'b, T>, | ||
| range_end: usize, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could be wrong... because it requires a bit of code wrangling to check that but....
wouldn't the code be clearer by changing this function into...
fn get_block<'a>(&'a self, tag: &'b T, byte_range: Range<usize>) -> Option<(Range<usize>, &CacheValue)> {}
the goal being to restrict the number of place where we manipulate CachedKey.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
...
i'm not sure the refactoring I suggest is a good idea, due to the write usage.
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
fulmicoton
reviewed
Nov 17, 2022
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn put_slice(&mut self, tag: T::Owned, byte_range: Range<usize>, bytes: OwnedBytes) { | ||
| let len = byte_range.end - byte_range.start; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suspect this code could have been mildly simpler... but it is well encapsulated and well tested, so actually I think we don't care.
fulmicoton
approved these changes
Nov 17, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
fix #2217
Add support for deleting using a set of terms (and searching with a term of search).