> On Sept. 26, 2012, 8:37 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/tests/zookeeper_tests.cpp, line 208 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7293/diff/1/?file=160214#file160214line208> > > > > curious, why you did MicroSeconds(10000).secs() instead of > > Seconds(10).secs()? > > > > On a side note, Clock should accept duration (don't remember if you > > already have a TODO for that)
Changed. And I agree, advance needs to take a duration (for a future review). - Benjamin ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7293/#review11942 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 26, 2012, 6:01 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/7293/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 26, 2012, 6:01 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, John Sirois, Vinod Kone, and Ben Mahler. > > > Description > ------- > > See summary (5 of 7). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/utils.hpp fc2023b > src/tests/zookeeper_tests.cpp 2e04069 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7293/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > This added test is EXPECTED to fail. > > > Thanks, > > Benjamin Hindman > >
