Closed rakhimov closed 8 years ago
I've passed the test and created a new release.
I think the current implementation is practical enough but not general. It is still failing to ignore any code complexity inside of assert. It is weird but possible to put "while, for, if, goto, switch, function, class, etc." through lambda.
Hmm, I think if extremely complicated expression is used in assertion, probably it shouldn't be ignored:-)
I think consistency is better. It is hard to come up with and justify qualifications for the code inside of asserts, but with the extension approach, users can decide when not to ignore asserts.
Good point.
And it should work with C/C++ code. Let me do it properly.
On 10 Jan 2016, at 9:17 PM, Olzhas Rakhimov notifications@github.com wrote:
I think consistency is better. It is hard to come up with and justify qualifications for the code inside of asserts, but with the extension approach, users can decide when not to ignore asserts.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/terryyin/lizard/pull/80#issuecomment-170343922.
This is additional tests for handling C/C++ asserts with an extension #79. The code should ignore complexity of any code inside assert.