Merged,
Maxim.
On 10/14/2015 15:11, Christophe Milard wrote:
That is my point:I think such a macro would make the overloading
clearer (more visible).
And I agree it can be done later. hence my reviews :-)
Christophe.
On 14 October 2015 at 14:03, Stuart Haslam <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:17:34PM +0200, Christophe Milard wrote:
> I have just reviewed the all series. As a side note though, I
thing a MACRO
> called ODP_TEST_OVERLOAD(test_func, new_test_func) should be
defined if a
> given test function should be "replaced") using the update
function. The
> TEST_INFO macro would not be able to be used as, for this
macro, the name
> of the test matches the name of the function and functions cannot be
> overloaded in C.
> I think that could be done in another patch, though. (hence my
reviews)
>
> Do you agree Stuart?
>
Replacing test functions can be done but it's a bit ugly as there's no
macro for doing it - see end of this mail -
https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/lng-odp/2015-September/015506.html
I don't really have any objection to adding one but it can be done
later, nobody needs it right now.
--
Stuart.
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
