TaskScheduler [7] SchedulerThreadPool

base/task_scheduler/task_traits.cc

Index: base/task_scheduler/task_traits.cc
diff --git a/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.cc b/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.cc
index 5a0906402ecb251a2a8f3d83f00ae599c64d5bb5..ad0e37f887166009b9608cf680a90d505e276f45 100644
--- a/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.cc
+++ b/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.cc
@@ -34,6 +34,11 @@ TaskTraits& TaskTraits::WithShutdownBehavior(
   return *this;
 }
 
+bool TaskTraits::operator==(const TaskTraits& other) const {
+  return with_file_io_ == other.with_file_io_ && priority_ == other.priority_ &&

[gab, 2016/04/14 19:34:16]

Could we do something like static_assert(sizeof(TaskTraits) == whatever-it-is,
"TaskTraits size changed, verify that operator=='s implementation is still
valid.")
?

This probably would not work across compiler toolchains and all with a fixed
value but I'd really like to find a way to make sure this is updated when new
fields are added to the struct...

@Rob: ideas here?

Or we make this a test only interface by moving the operator== outside the class
into the anonymous namespace of the test that needs it to be defined.

[robliao, 2016/04/14 20:32:05]

Adding discussion notes from chat:

This appears to work:
static_assert(offsetof(TaskTraits, shutdown_behavior_) +
sizeof(TaskTraits::shutdown_behavior_) == sizeof(TaskTraits), "Size Changed.
Update operator==");

You designate the last expected value and check that your size and size from the
expected value are the same.

But if we move operator== outside, we'll need to friend function it.

[fdoray, 2016/04/14 23:46:58]

Done.

+         shutdown_behavior_ == other.shutdown_behavior_;
+}
+
 std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const TaskPriority& task_priority) {
   switch (task_priority) {
     case TaskPriority::BACKGROUND: