On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Cedric BAIL <cedric.b...@free.fr> wrote:
> But that's not the only thing I dont consider ready for alpha. Eina > received a lot of path recently, and I didn't have time to review it > (and I don't know who wrote eina_strbuf.c but it lack a proper test > and coverage is 0). Same goes for Ecore, received too much stuff > recently. > Strbuf shares a lot of code with ustrbuf that's why they have a shared source file, eina_strbuf_template_c.i<http://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/trunk/eina/src/lib/eina_strbuf_template_c.i> . So although strbuf has 0 coverage, it's just because there are a couple of functions not checked, but not all. Generally, I think the coverage checking does not like stuff like #define FUNC_NAME function_name int FUNC_NAME(int x); (when you set different FUNC_NAME's in different places). -- Tom. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
