-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/35473/#review87980
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it!
I personally find it easier to read if we don't have the special 'return' cases:
```
{
if (!resources.empty()) {
// Do work.
}
}
Seems clearer than:
{
if (resources.empty()) {
// Don't do work by returning.
}
// Do work.
}
```
I think most of the cases where we've done the early returns were motivated by
a few reasons that don't hold here:
(1) We wanted to avoid deep nesting of logic (using 'returns' allowed us to
flatten the logical structure), and/or
(2) We wanted to eliminate many special cases in sequence, until only the
correct case remains (e.g. message handlers, (a) can't lookup framework, (b)
message sent by wrong pid, (c) invalid offers used, ...).
Up to you!
src/tests/examples_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/35473/#comment140390>
Don't forget to delete this
- Ben Mahler
On June 15, 2015, 10:03 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/35473/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated June 15, 2015, 10:03 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-2627
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2627
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Removed a few incorrect CHECKs in DRF sorter.
>
> See details in the ticket for the reason why this is needed.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/master/allocator/sorter/drf/sorter.cpp
> ac05afdc7d408735dd796faa68c943e75540aaa7
> src/tests/examples_tests.cpp 41a9265e91ea54b657afbd32c22e204c5f64ca17
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35473/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> sudo make check
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jie Yu
>
>
