Review Request: (code deduplication) use OutputExecuteJob in MakeJob

[Ivan Shapovalov]

> On Sept. 17, 2012, 11:41 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
> > projectbuilders/makebuilder/makejob.cpp, line 186
> > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106464/diff/1/?file=85699#file85699line186>
> >
> >     Does this forever {} really make sense?
> >     
> >     I'd change it for for(; item; item=item->parent())
> >     
> >     And in any case, does it even make sense to change this method? Let's restrict this patch to the things we want to change.

Ok, will use normal for-loop. And yes, it does make sense since the function is now virtual and doesn't take any arguments; so it is changed to be non-recursive.


- Ivan


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106464/#review19054
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 17, 2012, 9:23 a.m., Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106464/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 17, 2012, 9:23 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDevelop.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This is related to https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106463/.
> So, MakeJob is ported to use the class from given review.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   projectbuilders/makebuilder/makejob.h 59d37c9 
>   projectbuilders/makebuilder/makejob.cpp 9d4b85e 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106464/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Manual testing + existing unit tests.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ivan Shapovalov
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20120917/d048c1b2/attachment.html>