> On March 11, 2015, 9:59 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
> > src/tests/memory_test_helper_child.hpp, line 42
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/31276/diff/4/?file=890585#file890585line42>
> >
> >     Do you really need this extra file? Can you move this subcommand 
> > definition to memory_test_helper.hpp?
> 
> Chi Zhang wrote:
>     The con is it is an extra file. The pro is MTHMain is now completely 
> hidden from test writers, as it should be. It is only required that the main 
> function of the binary sees it. Also less compliation dependency this way. 
>     
>     Keept it this way?

It's not compltely hidden because the user can still include the header. I 
would say putting everything releated to helper to a single file so it's good 
for readability. What do u think?


- Jie


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31276/#review76118
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 10, 2015, 7:26 p.m., Chi Zhang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/31276/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 10, 2015, 7:26 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Dominic Hamon, Ian Downes, and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: mesos-2136
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/mesos-2136
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added cgroup memory pressure listening tests.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am 3059818231c46484039d179cd6916932eff6cd68 
>   src/tests/cgroups_tests.cpp 75c61aad80f894acb92a9752e8d1b6af70e5b9a6 
>   src/tests/memory_test_helper.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/tests/memory_test_helper.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/tests/memory_test_helper_child.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/tests/memory_test_helper_main.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31276/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chi Zhang
> 
>

Reply via email to