----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28092/#review61661 -----------------------------------------------------------
The only difference I see here is that now we're constructing the `Resources` object explicitly from `google::protobuf::RepeatedPtrField<Resource>`. Wouldn't the validation and flattening happen in the constructor of `Resources`? If yes, it wouldn't matter whether we construct it implicitly or explicitly, right? If no, 1. why not, 2. wouldn't we have to call `validate` and/or `flatten` explicitly as well? - Michael Park On Nov. 15, 2014, 7:11 a.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/28092/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 15, 2014, 7:11 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-1974 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1974 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Those interfaces are not good because repeated Resource ptr is not validated > (and flattened). > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/resources.hpp 0e37170 > src/tests/master_tests.cpp 66423a9 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28092/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Jie Yu > >
