----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60721/#review182728 -----------------------------------------------------------
Fix it, then Ship it! 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/duration.hpp Lines 402-403 (original), 413-414 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60721/#comment258723> Could you follow up with a patch to make our boundary checking consistent? i.e., we could use `min().nanos` and `max().nanos` here. 3rdparty/stout/tests/duration_tests.cpp Lines 65 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60721/#comment258722> Why the newline? - Greg Mann On July 26, 2017, 11:12 p.m., Gastón Kleiman wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/60721/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 26, 2017, 11:12 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov, Benjamin Mahler, Greg Mann, > and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-7661 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7661 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Made `Duration:parse()` return an error if the argument is out of the > range that a `Duration` can represent. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/duration.hpp > b0cd77b833f6fbf752b4db820fd43b87e1d1e476 > 3rdparty/stout/tests/duration_tests.cpp > 59b08f14849a8db31f11fbd0b2e1248c99afd9dd > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60721/diff/4/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Added a new expectation to an existing test and confirmed that tests still > pass. > > > Thanks, > > Gastón Kleiman > >
