Closed pavel-kirienko closed 8 months ago
Regarding the naming convention used see https://github.com/OpenCyphal/CETL/issues/85
Heads up: I tweaked two Doxygen settings to eliminate unhelpful warnings about undocumented enum members (well-named entities may not require explicit docs) and to automatically distribute docs to all group members to reduce doc copypasta.
Issues
0 New issues
Measures
0 Security Hotspots
97.7% Coverage on New Code
3.8% Duplication on New Code
optional
and related entities such asmake_optional
,nullopt
,in_place
, etc.type_traits.hpp
.CETL_PROJECT_VERSION
in the build recipes.CETL_NODISCARD
attribute.#verification
to the commit message will run the verification job.This PR is feature- and testing-complete but lacks the docs, which I am going to add next. The code is ready to be reviewed meanwhile. You may notice that the coverage reporting is odd because there are a few places where templates are not marked as instantiated while they actually are, also some branches in the comparison operators appear to be mislabeled as partially-covered.
The commit history is non-informative and should not be looked at, as it will be squashed anyway.
My next step is to finish #51 (which is blocked on
cetl::optional
) and then perhaps switch to #86, because there are certain similarities betweenoptional
andvariant
that will make it easier for me to do this part now rather than later.