> On April 12, 2013, 11:51 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > 1. All of the CHECK statements need to output the state. This could be > > obviated by just using switches / ifs everywhere. > > > > 2. I like the clarity of the switch statements, but they do have the > > downside that you sometimes use if statements, and sometimes use switch > > statements. I'm guessing this was to avoid nesting. Just a note, I'm good > > with the switches.
3. Use explicit case statements for all the states as discussed offline. - Ben ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10142/#review19115 ----------------------------------------------------------- On April 12, 2013, 9:24 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/10142/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 12, 2013, 9:24 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler. > > > Description > ------- > > This is based off https://reviews.apache.org/r/10112. > > Also fixed TODOs and other misc stuff from the above review. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/isolator.hpp d702041784f5db159efd7da4d916405e86d99741 > src/slave/slave.hpp 2529bf500a3265b10ad4cddde10c2d62a6cdb4a0 > src/slave/slave.cpp 325231458a6883019436e7cc5a37f85f0f5735fa > src/slave/status_update_manager.hpp > e6ca40c5c05c0952cf76fb1db7eff2e4270c0d24 > src/slave/status_update_manager.cpp > 044d245f370ef23ddc67fadbf7f8fe9d75dd662a > src/tests/isolator.hpp f885ccb44e809383e658f45d9a03eda174cf2d72 > src/tests/slave_recovery_tests.cpp d0ff9b73e06e89a5409f038be2766333e0a0689e > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10142/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Vinod Kone > >
