-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/67210/#review203442
-----------------------------------------------------------


Fix it, then Ship it!




Haven't take a good at these but they might be candidates to use the new macros:
```
$ grep '(EXPECT\|ASSERT)_(TRUE\|FALSE)(.*is(Some\|Error\|None)())' 
3rdparty/stout/ -r
...
3rdparty/stout//tests/ip_tests.cpp:    EXPECT_FALSE(network.isError());
3rdparty/stout//tests/mac_tests.cpp:    EXPECT_FALSE(mac.isError());
3rdparty/stout//tests/none_tests.cpp:  EXPECT_TRUE(o.isNone());
3rdparty/stout//tests/none_tests.cpp:  EXPECT_TRUE(o.isNone());
3rdparty/stout//tests/none_tests.cpp:  EXPECT_TRUE(o.isNone());
3rdparty/stout//tests/none_tests.cpp:  EXPECT_TRUE(r.isNone());
3rdparty/stout//tests/none_tests.cpp:  EXPECT_TRUE(r.isNone());
3rdparty/stout//tests/none_tests.cpp:  EXPECT_TRUE(r.isNone());
3rdparty/stout//tests/os_tests.cpp:    ASSERT_FALSE(process.isError());
3rdparty/stout//tests/os_tests.cpp:    ASSERT_FALSE(process.isError());
```
We could fix them in a follow-up patch.


3rdparty/stout/tests/os/sendfile_tests.cpp
Lines 65-66 (original), 65-66 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/67210/#comment285670>

    Can we use `ASSERT_SOME_EQ` here?


- Chun-Hung Hsiao


On May 18, 2018, 10:35 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/67210/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 18, 2018, 10:35 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Chun-Hung Hsiao and Jan Schlicht.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Used `*_SOME` macro for checking `Try` values in stout.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/stout/tests/os/sendfile_tests.cpp 
> 05966ae067ae3972598da3370eb16fdce5736c21 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/67210/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check`
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin Bannier
> 
>

Reply via email to