mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexander Rukletsov" <ruklet...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 37827: Added a test for converting JSON arrays to repeated protobufs.
Date Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:01:27 GMT


> On Sept. 10, 2015, 9:54 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.cpp, lines 191-192
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/37827/diff/6/?file=1066089#file1066089line191>
> >
> >     The above test already performs the roundtrip of Protobuf -> JSON -> Protobuf.
Is it beneficial to add an additional conversion to JSON here? What does it further test?
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
>     The rationale here is that equality check for protobufs is not well defined (we do
it overselves), hence an additional check via converted `JSON` objects looked to me like a
reasonable addition.
> 
> Michael Park wrote:
>     Hm, I see. So I think you're saying that if the protobuf happened to parse incorrectly
but the test passed due to a bug in `operator==`, converting it back to `JSON` for the final
test could expose that bug. Is that correct?
>     
>     If it is, it doesn't seem like this is the right place to test for that. It would
make more sense to me to add a separate test for `operator==` for `SimpleMessage`.
>     In general, I think everything being used in a test aside from the thing being tested
should have already been tested for correctness.
>     Since otherwise we would have to test the dependent functions being used in any given
test in addition to the thing that's actually being tested.
>     
>     What do you think?

I think you're right. Though it's more work, we should do it properly. Will update the RR
chain in a while.


- Alexander


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37827/#review98371
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 10, 2015, 6:36 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/37827/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 10, 2015, 6:36 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, haosdent huang, Joseph Wu, and Michael Park.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3312
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3312
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.cpp c56d6a3098293eb3659b3066f10e875927ec3ac3

>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.pb.h cfc2803e42284f641879fb24bce1282215c8ea52

>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.pb.cc a1d4084661345f9367c75f9db61279f032b93e69

>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.proto bbd36d39e9588eb8eea6d739451ad3bab029ca08

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37827/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check (Mac OS 10.10.4)
> 
> **NOTE**: Filed [MESOS-3323](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3323) to clean
up protobuf generation.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message