-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 377
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
[PROF-7145] Remove support for profiling Ruby 2.2 #2592
Changes from all commits
f653915
0482d73
b751833
099cd20
69e2bab
923ad4f
4e95ff4
6b1f5ce
ff8eead
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ def start | |
|
||
@worker_thread = Thread.new do | ||
begin | ||
Thread.current.name = self.class.name unless Gem::Version.new(RUBY_VERSION) < Gem::Version.new('2.3') | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Wondering if we should have a helper or two to do these kind of checks instead of ad-hoc winging the checks each time. This would also make such calls log-able/trackable/grep-able. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I would usually say yes, but given that's additional work done just for the benefit of Ruby 2.1 and 2.2, in this very specific case I don't think it's work the extra effort. |
||
Thread.current.name = self.class.name | ||
|
||
self.class._native_sampling_loop(self) | ||
|
||
|
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.
Here's another ad-hoc pattern.
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 pattern shows up in the codebase 3 times:
...but actually only shows up once in the code shipped to customers.
I'm somewhat hesitant in introducing additional complexity to avoid having duplication in test/scaffolding code, so I'm leaving towards keeping it as-is.