Fix incorrect type check.

[chrisstaite-menlo]

When re-factoring the GrpcScheduler change, a dodgy copy-paste made it in. Fix up the type check to the correct type.

---

This change is 

[allada]

Can you write a simple test for this too?

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)

[chrisstaite-menlo]

Yes, and it turns out there's a bug in action_name too...

[allada]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r2.
Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 75 at r2 (raw file):

    pub fn action_name(&self) -> String {
        format!(
            "{}/{}-{}/{:X}",

🤦 I thought .str() encoded size_bytes. I think this should be renamed: .hash_str() to remove confusion.

[chrisstaite-menlo]

Reviewable status: 1 of 12 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @allada)

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 75 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, allada (Nathan (Blaise) Bruer) wrote…

🤦 I thought .str() encoded size_bytes. I think this should be renamed: .hash_str() to remove confusion.

That function is used in a lot of places! Funny how this simple one string change turned into a 91 line 12 file diff.

[allada]

Reviewed 11 of 11 files at r4.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed (commit messages unreviewed), 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 780 at r2 (raw file):

}

fn from_any<T>(message: &Any) -> Result<T, Error>

clever! 💯

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 840 at r2 (raw file):

        };

        println!("Operation name: {}", operation.name);

nit: debug artifact.

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 899 at r2 (raw file):

        Self {
            name: val.unique_qualifier.action_name(),
            metadata: Some(to_any(&metadata)),

nit: Here (and above) Don't we need to deal with the result of to_any()? I'm kinda confused on how this is compiling.

[allada]

Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)

[allada]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)

[chrisstaite-menlo]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @allada)

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 780 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, allada (Nathan (Blaise) Bruer) wrote…

clever! 💯

Can't claim the credit here, all from tokio-rs/prost#299....

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 840 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, allada (Nathan (Blaise) Bruer) wrote…

nit: debug artifact.

Yeah, already gone.

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 899 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, allada (Nathan (Blaise) Bruer) wrote…

nit: Here (and above) Don't we need to deal with the result of to_any()? I'm kinda confused on how this is compiling.

to_any can't fail... only from_any can.

[allada]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)

---

cas/scheduler/action_messages.rs line 899 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, chrisstaite-menlo (Chris Staite) wrote…

to_any can't fail... only from_any can.

aaah, need more coffee.

[allada]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @chrisstaite-menlo)