This is a workaround for #450 . It creates a new Macro called SkipTest that can be used instead of FailTest, but will still result in an overall success. It's use probably should always be accompanied by a comment explaining why it is nescessary.
I have rebased my feature branch to be current with the master branch using to minimize conflicts and headaches
[x] yes
[ ] no
Which compilers were tested
[ ] g++
[x] icpc
[ ] clang
[ ] other (please specify)
These changes are isolated to the
[ ] gui
[ ] core library
[ ] gpu core library
[x] program it modifies
How has the functionality been tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Please also note any relevant details for your test configuration.
[ ] Tested manually from GUI
[x] Tested manually from CLI
[ ] Passed console tests
[ ] Passed samples functional testing
[ ] other (please specify)
Checklist:
[x] I have not changed anything that did not need to be changed
[x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
[x] I have commented my code, (w.r.t. why), particularly in hard-to-understand areas
[ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation {Ok to pass for now}
[ ] My changes generate no new warnings
[ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules
Description
This is a workaround for #450 . It creates a new Macro called
SkipTest
that can be used instead ofFailTest
, but will still result in an overall success. It's use probably should always be accompanied by a comment explaining why it is nescessary.I have rebased my feature branch to be current with the master branch using to minimize conflicts and headaches
Which compilers were tested
These changes are isolated to the
How has the functionality been tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Please also note any relevant details for your test configuration.
Checklist: