----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38161/#review100993 -----------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Alex, didn't realize I was on the reviewers here, so apologies for the delay! Why don't we just name the constant with DEFAULT to avoid the need for this and to make the meaning of the constant more clear? src/tests/fault_tolerance_tests.cpp (lines 620 - 621) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38161/#comment158295> Don't think you need these comments, we should just s/REGISTRATION_BACKOFF_FACTOR/DEFAULT_REGISTRATION_BACKOFF_FACTOR/ to be more explicit about it. We've started doing this for some of our constants already, but need to continue! :) src/tests/fault_tolerance_tests.cpp (lines 1547 - 1551) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38161/#comment158296> Ditto here, it seems like if we use DEFAULT in the name, we don't have to bother setting it here, thoughts? - Ben Mahler On Sept. 28, 2015, 5:08 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/38161/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 28, 2015, 5:08 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > See summary. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/fault_tolerance_tests.cpp > c97bc4691f9bac4a8677e6d2247be96ee9674b57 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38161/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check (Mac OS 10.10.4) > > > Thanks, > > Alexander Rukletsov > >
