Skip to content

Common mistakes#3

Open
CryptoOnion wants to merge 23 commits into
scala-loci:masterfrom
CryptoOnion:mistakes
Open

Common mistakes#3
CryptoOnion wants to merge 23 commits into
scala-loci:masterfrom
CryptoOnion:mistakes

Conversation

@CryptoOnion

@CryptoOnion CryptoOnion commented May 25, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown

During the project we used the papers and including this project for getting started with the framework. We encountered some issues on our own and thought it makes the sense to improve it based on our experience.

Some parts of the papers were outdated and some minor things in this project too. Here is a summary of the changes we did:

Summary

  • Added:

    • Advise against blocking calls in fields
    • How to define a common main method
    • Add section explaining about subjective values
    • Explain not transmittable Remote[*]
    • Alternative local syntax
    • Explain type mismatch error with Futures for missing imports
    • Transmittable upickle example (package declaration vs our companion objects)
  • Clarify Optional peer definitions usage

  • Fixes:

    • Fix some typos
    • Fix ability to run the examples like adding missing package declaration
    • Drop outdated placed[*] syntax

Updated:

  • Fixes:
    • Updated exception printing

Comment thread concepts/placement.md Outdated
Comment thread faq.md Outdated
Comment thread faq.md Outdated
Comment thread faq.md
@CryptoOnion CryptoOnion changed the title Our improvements based on our experience on the project Common mistakes Jun 2, 2020
@CryptoOnion CryptoOnion marked this pull request as ready for review June 8, 2020 15:28
@CryptoOnion CryptoOnion requested a review from pweisenburger June 8, 2020 15:28
Comment thread getting_started/placement.md Outdated
for (line <- scala.io.Source.stdin.getLines) {
message.fire(line)
}
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
}

@JanisMittelstaedt I guess this one is not needed here.

We already have one open and close brace for the for-loop and a closing one later for the method.

Comment thread faq.md
Comment thread faq.md Outdated
Comment thread faq.md Outdated
Comment thread faq.md Outdated

@pweisenburger pweisenburger left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

see comments on files for some smaller changes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants