----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32657/#review79223 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/tests/port_mapping_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/32657/#comment128443> Why the change in logic here? Assuming I understand the intent from the comment, would it be clearer to simply have this? ```c++ // Return true if all metrics are present. return (p50(o).isSome() && p90(o).isSome() && ... ); ``` - Ian Downes On April 1, 2015, 8:39 a.m., Paul Brett wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/32657/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 1, 2015, 8:39 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Chi Zhang, Ian Downes, and Cong Wang. > > > Bugs: mesos-2332 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/mesos-2332 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Refactor wrappers for JSON encoded stats in preparation for greater reuse > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.hpp > 33837b4662959a003c8f38d1e786c6615287a4ff > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp > e691d463515084518c94cdec3fbdf37be4a72977 > src/tests/port_mapping_tests.cpp f4124c3e880e043729579a829e1057727741d131 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32657/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Paul Brett > >
