-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 164
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
refactor: Switch to trailing return types in core #599
refactor: Switch to trailing return types in core #599
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #599 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 80.75% 80.86% +0.11%
===========================================
Files 116 116
Lines 5086 5117 +31
===========================================
+ Hits 4107 4138 +31
Misses 979 979 |
btw how did you find and decide which function should change to trailing return type? did you do it manually or some script? |
I think we should make a new branch for all the refactoring for now, freeze merge in develop for a week or so. put all the refactoring change in this branch and then just squash all those and merge in develop. what are your thoughts? would love to have a single commit for all these changes(just my preference) |
Manually
Yes, there certainly will be a single commit. We always do "Squash and merge". So, I don't think any freezing is necessary. I will plough on with the PR over next days, syncing it with the The branch can be updated by anyone, by the way. |
I was hoping for trailing return + refactor in one commit. changing to trailing return type is a kinda reflector too that's why. Otherwise, we can have these separate I don't mind either way. |
I'm sorry but I'm lost. In #599 (comment) I explained that this PR #599 will eventually become a single commit PR. What else do you mean to suggest? UPDATE: Commits squashed ;) |
c115a66
to
3caa9ae
Compare
I mean this trailing return type changes + the Big reformat as one commit |
If you don't mind, I'd prefer to keep them separate. They both fall into the refactoring category, but the C++ syntax change is different from style change. |
yeah makes sense, let keep them separate. |
46b3996
to
a0b95e7
Compare
- Trailing return types everywhere - Optionally, return type deduction where sensible (simple and short functions) This is related to introduction of common .clang-format, see boostorg#596 (comment)
@lpranam This is finished and if the CI-s get green, then I'm going to merge it. I don't think there is need to actually run the line by line review, unless you think otherwise. |
@mloskot I am happy to not review this line by line 😉 |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN90RWb9f9M&t=23s I just wanted to make it clear in case you wonder what I may expect to happen about it here 😛 |
* develop: test: Add more basic cases for image class (#423) test: Add virtual_2d_locator fixture; is_2d_traversable test case test: Check more properties of indexed_image_view from extension/toolbox test: Add basic is_1d_traversable cases for image_view chore: Update CMakeSettings.json sample [ci skip] chore: Update CMake to use latest cmake-conan/0.18.1 [ci skip] Add pmr image typedefs (#529) test: Add test cases for image with empty dimensions (#702) test: Case test_constructor_from_view was not called fix: Memory leak in image class for empty dimensions (#649) docs: Bump C++11 to C++14 as current required (#700) ci: Remove C++11 build jobs after C++14 switch (#698) build: Fix CMake source file extensions must be explicit refactor: Switch to trailing return types (#599) build: Bump Boost required by CMake from 1.72 to 1.80 build: Update CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD from 11 to 14
Description
//
hack forclang-format
, see Introduce official clang-format #596 (comment)References
Tasklist