-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#review36025
-----------------------------------------------------------



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#comment66823>

    Can you revert back to <> includes per the other discussion?



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#comment66821>

    Why? We intentionally added Failure as syntactic sugar. :)



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#comment66820>

    Why this TODO? Failure is used to implicitly construct a Future, the copy 
occurring from the need to store the failure message inside Future. Which copy 
would be eliminated through an accessor?



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#comment66818>

    Ditto about fatal performing exit(1) and us losing a stacktrace here since 
we're no longer getting SIGABRT. Can you revert for now?



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#comment66816>

    Can you do this optimization in a separate review?



3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/http_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/#comment66815>

    Can you kill this comment and just use .get() on the hashmap?
    
    EXPECT_EQ(http::statuses.get(200), future.get().status); // Avoid mutating 
http::statuses if you like, should work because Option<T> has == operator 
against T.
    EXPECT_SOME_EQ("chunked", future.get().headers.get("Transfer-Encoding"));
    EXPECT_EQ("Hello world\n", future.get().body);


- Ben Mahler


On Feb. 24, 2014, 11:36 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 24, 2014, 11:36 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1008
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1008
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp 
> e45f4f79faeefbffc28d855d2f74e8df69099f18 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/http_tests.cpp 
> 779c30b235506453a68f7a089dd4438e540fce5a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18443/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dominic Hamon
> 
>

Reply via email to