> On April 5, 2016, 7:37 a.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> > src/launcher/http_command_executor.cpp, lines 475-477
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44424/diff/5/?file=1324021#file1324021line475>
> >
> >     Why change this? What's wrong with the previous version spanning 2 
> > lines?

The reason should be that previous the whole launch task code into `received()` 
directly then they can not fit into 2 lines, now it should be OK since we have 
moved those code into a separate method.


> On April 5, 2016, 7:37 a.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> > src/launcher/http_command_executor.cpp, lines 1157-1165
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44424/diff/5/?file=1324021#file1324021line1157>
> >
> >     2 space indent here.

I see other components does the similar, e.g.:
https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/cgroups/net_cls.cpp#L340:L345
https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp#L1950:L1964

So I guess here we should have 4 space indent?


- Qian


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/44424/#review126927
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 4, 2016, 5:11 p.m., Qian Zhang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/44424/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 4, 2016, 5:11 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3558
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3558
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Updated http_command_executor.cpp to use v1 API.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/launcher/http_command_executor.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/44424/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Qian Zhang
> 
>

Reply via email to