> On Jan. 26, 2016, 6:37 a.m., Guangya Liu wrote: > > src/tests/resources_tests.cpp, line 1603 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42751/diff/1/?file=1220217#file1220217line1603> > > > > Why do you update here?
The goal of this test is to validate that two resources with different `ReservationInfo` are treated as distinct (not equal). If the roles are also different, then the resources will be considered distinct for that reason instead. > On Jan. 26, 2016, 6:37 a.m., Guangya Liu wrote: > > src/tests/resources_tests.cpp, lines 1672-1673 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42751/diff/1/?file=1220217#file1220217line1672> > > > > Is this useful? I think that we already covered the `same` contain case > > in `EXPECT_TRUE((r1 + r2).contains(r1 + r2));` I think it is useful, yes: the checks involving the `+` operator depend on `operator+` being implemented correctly. - Neil ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42751/#review116289 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 25, 2016, 10:59 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/42751/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 25, 2016, 10:59 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Michael Park. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > We should check that two reservations with the same role but different > principals are considered distinct. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/resources_tests.cpp 54a4fa88bfdcff3c0a7e89cbf3a1674c954b7f23 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42751/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Neil Conway > >
