Skip to content
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

iox-#1969 rework constructors for expected #1970

Conversation

elBoberido
Copy link
Member

@elBoberido elBoberido commented Apr 11, 2023

Pre-Review Checklist for the PR Author

  1. Code follows the coding style of CONTRIBUTING.md
  2. Tests follow the best practice for testing
  3. Changelog updated in the unreleased section including API breaking changes
  4. Branch follows the naming format (iox-123-this-is-a-branch)
  5. Commits messages are according to this guideline
  6. Update the PR title
    • Follow the same conventions as for commit messages
    • Link to the relevant issue
  7. Relevant issues are linked
  8. Add sensible notes for the reviewer
  9. All checks have passed (except task-list-completed)
  10. All touched (C/C++) source code files from iceoryx_hoofs are added to ./clang-tidy-diff-scans.txt
  11. Assign PR to reviewer

Notes for Reviewer

This PR adds the in_place_t direct constructors for the expected to better align with the std::expected

Checklist for the PR Reviewer

  • Commits are properly organized and messages are according to the guideline
  • Code according to our coding style and naming conventions
  • Unit tests have been written for new behavior
  • Public API changes are documented via doxygen
  • Copyright owner are updated in the changed files
  • All touched (C/C++) source code files from iceoryx_hoofs have been added to ./clang-tidy-diff-scans.txt
  • PR title describes the changes

Post-review Checklist for the PR Author

  1. All open points are addressed and tracked via issues

References

@elBoberido elBoberido self-assigned this Apr 11, 2023
@elBoberido elBoberido added refactoring Refactor code without adding features technical debt unclean code and design flaws labels Apr 11, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 11, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #1970 (18adcee) into master (e7b572b) will decrease coverage by 0.31%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1970      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.50%   74.20%   -0.31%     
==========================================
  Files         401      401              
  Lines       15809    15814       +5     
  Branches     2225     2225              
==========================================
- Hits        11779    11734      -45     
- Misses       3322     3376      +54     
+ Partials      708      704       -4     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 74.20% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
unittests_timing ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
iceoryx_hoofs/vocabulary/include/iox/expected.hpp 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...x_hoofs/vocabulary/include/iox/detail/expected.inl 97.22% <100.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

@elBoberido elBoberido force-pushed the iox-1969-rework-constructors-for-expected branch from 97acb2c to 73eda66 Compare April 18, 2023 10:15
@elBoberido elBoberido changed the title WIP iox-#1969 rework constructors for expected iox-#1969 rework constructors for expected Apr 18, 2023
@elBoberido elBoberido marked this pull request as ready for review April 18, 2023 10:17
Copy link
Contributor

@mossmaurice mossmaurice left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, the changes look good.

One Q: Wouldn't it make sense to deprecate create_value and create_error right away on this PR?

elfenpiff
elfenpiff previously approved these changes Apr 18, 2023
@elBoberido
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks, the changes look good.

One Q: Wouldn't it make sense to deprecate create_value and create_error right away on this PR?

No, I would wait till unexpect_t is available

@elBoberido elBoberido force-pushed the iox-1969-rework-constructors-for-expected branch from 73eda66 to c2b8fb4 Compare April 18, 2023 16:07
@elBoberido elBoberido force-pushed the iox-1969-rework-constructors-for-expected branch from c2b8fb4 to 83c16ab Compare April 18, 2023 16:40
@elBoberido elBoberido force-pushed the iox-1969-rework-constructors-for-expected branch from 83c16ab to 18adcee Compare April 18, 2023 16:43
@elBoberido elBoberido merged commit e29d6c6 into eclipse-iceoryx:master Apr 18, 2023
@elBoberido elBoberido deleted the iox-1969-rework-constructors-for-expected branch April 18, 2023 17:44
@elBoberido elBoberido linked an issue Apr 18, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
9 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
refactoring Refactor code without adding features technical debt unclean code and design flaws
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Better align 'iox::expected' with 'std::expected'
3 participants