----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45457/#review125978 -----------------------------------------------------------
How would these queries produce incorrect results as compared to previous queries? Perviously, a check for the collection being null would have had to have been made by the caller (or a check for !IsSet) to skip the calls you've added precondition checks to. The IsSet calls are now gone, meaning the call sites using those have been semantically adjusted. I think this only leaves the callers who pass null of which there should be none due to the semantic change as well. - John Sirois On March 29, 2016, 5:01 p.m., Bill Farner wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/45457/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 29, 2016, 5:01 p.m.) > > > Review request for Aurora, John Sirois and Zameer Manji. > > > Bugs: AURORA-1652 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1652 > > > Repository: aurora > > > Description > ------- > > Short of surveying call sites, i don't know the impact of this change. > However, my sense is that it's still better to fail fast than produce > incorrect results (due to the recent change in semantics of filtering by an > empty iterable). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/base/Query.java > c76b365f43eb6a3b9b0b63a879b43eb04dcd8fac > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45457/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Bill Farner > >
