Codecov Report

Merging #2354 (ed66352) into main (0eaa794) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2354   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.41%   87.41%           
=======================================
  Files         199      199           
  Lines        6018     6018           
=======================================
  Hits         5260     5260           
  Misses        758      758           

I thought commenting out the failing test for time being was the better approach :) Not super sure if we should ditch the const on those member variables because of a bug somewhere else This would in general prevent any optimizations from compiler, and also type safety.

I thought commenting out the failing test for time being was the better approach :) Not super sure if we should ditch the const on those member variables because of a bug somewhere else This would in general prevent any optimizations from compiler, and also type safety.

The const itself is highly suspicious.

Members like:

• const char *ptr;
• const & int;

make sense, but I have never seen a member using:

• const std::string str;

If the member is really const, how is it properly destroyed by the destructor for example ?

I think there is confusion in this code, if an object is const, the entire instance should be const (as in const ParentBasedSampler *sampler), using a non const ParentBasedSampler object which has a const member makes no sense (to me).

Taking this for example:

const std::string description_;

The method GetDescription() is const, so it does not change the object, this part is expected.

Making the member const is rather strange.

Reverted to first solution, comment out code that fails to build.