-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/#review34725
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/common/http.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/#comment64964>

    Task is coming from mesos.hpp so this forward declaration does not make 
sense?



src/common/http.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/#comment64967>

    Include <map> as well?



src/common/http.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/#comment64966>

    Can you add using clauses for map and string?



src/common/http.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/#comment64968>

    This appears to not be saving very much in terms of readability, what if we 
just directly use these below?
    
    case Value::SCALAR:
      roles[resource.role()].values[resource.name()] =
        resource.scalar().value();
    



src/common/http.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/#comment64969>

    newline above here?


- Ben Mahler


On Feb. 18, 2014, 5:58 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 18, 2014, 5:58 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-990
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-990
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am c30706846bca1fa3287291e39f46a23713ad1ba4 
>   src/common/http.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/common/http.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/master/http.cpp 966eed6d8340038265ef799f1b6149502ccc606e 
>   src/slave/http.cpp c4f598faf6807214608cc89a6d9cf665133f95f3 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18144/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check.
> 
> ran master/slave and checked http://localhost:5050/master/state.json by eye.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dominic Hamon
> 
>

Reply via email to