Skip to content

Prefixed macros with BOOST - #411

Merged
mloskot merged 3 commits into
boostorg:developfrom
Thihup:feature/prefix-macro-boost
Dec 17, 2019
Merged

Prefixed macros with BOOST#411
mloskot merged 3 commits into
boostorg:developfrom
Thihup:feature/prefix-macro-boost

Conversation

@Thihup

@Thihup Thihup commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Prefixes some macros with BOOST

References

This pull request closes #410

@mloskot

mloskot commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Thihup Thank you for your contribution, awesome!

Please, refrain from promptly reacting to the further @ned14's suggestions for a moment.
I'm believe there are no changes needed in the auxiliary files, just C++ files, see #410 (comment)

@Thihup

Thihup commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi @mloskot!

I'll wait to see if it's really necessary change the auxiliary files.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

@mloskot

mloskot commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Sorry for the inconvenience.

No need, no problem. I just didn't want you to keep doing work unnecessarily.

@mloskot

mloskot commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Thihup I'd suggest to focus this PR on renaming C++ #define-ed macros only in all .hpp and .cpp files. Sounds good, do you agree?

Review of the auxiliary files is a good idea, but I'd prefer to do it in separate PR, as per my #410 (comment)

@Thihup

Thihup commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Sounds good to me

@Thihup

Thihup commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Should I prefix the macros in tests too?

@ned14

ned14 commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

For tests it's up to you, but for easy checking that you're good it's probably easiest.

@mloskot

mloskot commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Thihup

Should I prefix the macros in tests too?

Which macros you mean?

@Thihup

Thihup commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

GIL_Tests (test/legacy/performance.cpp | recreate_image.cpp)
GIL_TEST_CHANNEL_CONVERT_FROM (test/core/channel/algorithm_channel_convert.cpp) .

I think there is no others cpp to edit but those. If it's not necessary I think it's ready to merge.

@mloskot

mloskot commented Dec 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Thihup

GIL_Tests (test/legacy/performance.cpp | recreate_image.cpp)

This is not an explicit #define-ed macro, but test suite name parameter.

This is part of Legacy Tests which are assumed promised as left untouched as per test/legacy/README.md.

However, I'd suggest to rename the two GIL_Tests to all lower-case gil_legacy_tests.

This should avoid confusing the macro check tooling.

GIL_TEST_CHANNEL_CONVERT_FROM (test/core/channel/algorithm_channel_convert.cpp) .

Yes, this can be prefixed indeed. Good catch.

@mloskot mloskot added this to the Boost 1.73 milestone Dec 16, 2019
@mloskot mloskot added cat/annoyance Not a bug, not a feature, but something that should be improved cat/refactoring Any nonfunctional changes labels Dec 16, 2019
@mloskot
mloskot merged commit 94cd568 into boostorg:develop Dec 17, 2019
@mloskot

mloskot commented Dec 17, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Thihup Thank you very much for your help!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cat/annoyance Not a bug, not a feature, but something that should be improved cat/refactoring Any nonfunctional changes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Prefix macros with BOOST_

3 participants