----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59383/#review175903 -----------------------------------------------------------
Fix it, then Ship it! src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp Lines 5500-5501 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59383/#comment249250> Is this intentional? It seems like it is. As in, `used` is not supposed to be accumulated. Is so, can we just do ``` hashmap<FrameworkID, Resources> used { {frameworks[i % frameworkCount].id(), allocation} }; ``` so that the intentions is clearer? or even just pass it inline. src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp Lines 5537 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/59383/#comment249251> Can we do `i++` here just to stay consistent with the one only 4 lines above? It seems the rest of this file uses `i++` too. - Michael Park On May 22, 2017, 11:33 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/59383/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 22, 2017, 11:33 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Mahler, James Peach, Michael Park, and > Jiang Yan Xu. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This covers the case where the vast majority (99%) of frameworks have > suppressed offers. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp > 6dee2296d5a14185dbf7eee17968b20148839bfd > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59383/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Neil Conway > >
