Switch to G2O_REGISTER_TYPE_NAME macro #832
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Ah sorry, saw the comment here too late. Would be nice if you can quickly rebase this PR. Thank you. |
The new macro takes name as a char literal (or any other string_view-compatible type), and verifies that no white space characters are present in the name. This prevents clang-format from introducing white space into the type names.
Use G2O_REGISTER_TYPE_NAME throughout g2o code, replacing the use of the deprecated G2O_REGISTER_TYPE macro. Remove // clang-format off annotations that were guarding type declarations. Apply clang-format to affected sources to wrap long lines at 80 columns.
iillyyaa
force-pushed
the
use-string-type-names
branch
from
804b170 to
18d9a72
Compare
no problem, rebased |
RainerKuemmerle
approved these changes
Aug 27, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This implements the new macro that we discussed in: #830 (comment)
This can be either merged on top of #830 (I'm happy to rebase if that happens) or instead of it.