-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#review91346
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (line 52)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144705>

    split args onto separate lines



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (line 62)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144710>

    lines? it's 1 or more, how about just calling input?
    
    is debug() a better name for this function?



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (lines 65 - 69)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144709>

    use a ternary if here?
    ```cpp
    s << (version.isError() ? "Error:" + version.error()
                            : version.get());
    ```



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (line 104)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144706>

    I don't think we use this, favoring 
    ```cpp
    foreach (const tuple<Version, string>&, input)
    ```
    
    Is Version hashable? If so, iterating over a Version -> input would be much 
cleaner
    ```cpp
    foreachpair(const Version& version, const string& input, inputs)
    ```
    
    Or, just use the string version and parse the string version inside the 
loop?
    ```cpp
    hashmap<string, string> input {
      "2.6.39", "123,cycles\n0.123,task-clock"
    }
    ```



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (line 157)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144714>

    Do you need to keep all the logging of the context  on failed expectations 
after the test has been correctly written? It clutters the code...



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (line 191)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144711>

    ditto



src/tests/perf_tests.cpp (line 226)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/#comment144712>

    ditto


- Ian Downes


On July 10, 2015, 1:52 p.m., Paul Brett wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 10, 2015, 1:52 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Chi Zhang, Ian Downes, and Cong Wang.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2834
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2834
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Test cases for performance monitor support of multiple output versions 
> depending on kernel version.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/perf_tests.cpp 281eed0094faead67dc7f84df6407686aae88b01 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36380/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> sudo make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paul Brett
> 
>

Reply via email to