Closed Yury-Fridlyand closed 1 month ago
@barshaul, Should I add this to change log? It brings no changes for the user.
Instead of this massive change, rename command
to Cmd
in protobuf. It's only used internally either way, and you can add a comment // commend
.
Amount of changes will be the same, unfortunately. Protobuf complains vs having the same name in a enum and in a class.
protobuf/redis_request.proto:178:5: "Command" is already defined in "redis_request".
protobuf/redis_request.proto:178:5: Note that enum values use C++ scoping rules, meaning that enum values are siblings of their type, not children of it. Therefore, "Command" must be unique within "redis_request", not just within "RequestType".
Amount of changes will be the same, unfortunately. Protobuf complains vs having the same name in a enum and in a class.
protobuf/redis_request.proto:178:5: "Command" is already defined in "redis_request". protobuf/redis_request.proto:178:5: Note that enum values use C++ scoping rules, meaning that enum values are siblings of their type, not children of it. Therefore, "Command" must be unique within "redis_request", not just within "RequestType".
as I said - rename the COMMAND
command name to Cmd in protobuf, don't call it Command.
enum RequestType {
...
CMD = 137; // COMMAND
}
Got it, thanks.
Issue #, if available: N/A
Description of changes: Without that rename we can't add command
command
to proto. Surprise!Unfortunately, linters cause much more changes rather than simple rename.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.