----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/55868/#review163768 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp (line 4136) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/55868/#comment235271> re Allocation vs. OfferedResources: Guangya and I chatted a bunch on /r/50868/. Seems like we can just use a single `struct Allocation` defined at the top of the file (which you are improving here) throughout without getting into a semantic differences between offers vs. allocation (at least right now). (In this file the choice between a OfferedResources vs. Allocation seems arbitrary) Thoughts? - Jiang Yan Xu On Jan. 23, 2017, 6:31 p.m., Benjamin Mahler wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/55868/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 23, 2017, 6:31 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Michael Park. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This was necessary to greatly simplify the changes needed to the > allocator tests as we introduce support for multi-role frameworks. > > The main improvement here is to establish and use equality on the > `Allocation` struct, which makes the tests more readable and avoids > the manual probing of the allocation structure across all the tests. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp > 1edd0ecc8a93cd41532e1cf3641f67c780ab23a5 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/55868/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Benjamin Mahler > >