> On Dec. 9, 2015, 2:31 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > src/tests/fetcher_tests.cpp, line 278
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/40978/diff/1/?file=1154021#file1154021line278>
> >
> >     Unneeded dead code which should be removed (otherwise should be `= 
> > default`).

You are right, but all other process constructors use the syntax used here. I 
suggest we leave it for now and discuss changing this offline (from this 
ticket).


> On Dec. 9, 2015, 2:31 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > src/tests/fetcher_tests.cpp, line 295
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/40978/diff/1/?file=1154021#file1154021line295>
> >
> >     You could use `spawn(*process)` here to be more brief, have an 
> > additional `NULL` check, and to keep the appearance already present in 
> > `EXPECT_CALL`s here.

Unfortunately there is no precedence for this. All other code like this uses 
get(). I think this is good enough because it is clear that this is a fresh 
instance that gets used here.


- Bernd


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/40978/#review109486
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Dec. 4, 2015, 10:49 a.m., Joseph Wu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/40978/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 4, 2015, 10:49 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Bernd Mathiske, Ben Mahler, and Artem Harutyunyan.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This addresses the comment here: 
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/40501/#comment168391
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/fetcher_tests.cpp 069c9bc6bc54d5bc1275c55e329457651d3c7b71 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/40978/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joseph Wu
> 
>

Reply via email to