-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
Change expected-value matching to a valueEquals recursive template. #11560
Change expected-value matching to a valueEquals recursive template. #11560
Conversation
PR #11560: Size comparison from b717b36 to ccd46c1 Full report (7 builds for k32w, qpg, telink)
|
@vivien-apple @yufengwangca @msandstedt @saurabhst @jepenven-silabs @jmartinez-silabs @LuDuda @Damian-Nordic Please take a look? This is the first step to getting yaml tests to check the entire received value. |
ccd46c1
to
e1ae8e5
Compare
PR #11560: Size comparison from a04576d to e1ae8e5 Full report (9 builds for k32w, p6, qpg, telink)
|
For now this does not change any functionality: there is no change in the generated code. It just cleans up how nullable and optional are handled.
e1ae8e5
to
ea136f4
Compare
PR #11560: Size comparison from a04576d to ea136f4 Full report (38 builds for efr32, esp32, k32w, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, p6, qpg, telink)
|
Fast tracking this, as this is updating a test tool |
…roject-chip#11560) For now this does not change any functionality: there is no change in the generated code. It just cleans up how nullable and optional are handled.
For now this does not change any functionality: there is no change in
the generated code. It just cleans up how nullable and optional are
handled.
Problem
Expected-value checking is too complicated.
Change overview
Make it simpler, so it's easier to extend for lists and structs.
Testing
No behavior changes so far.