On 1/23/2015 10:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 23/01/15 10:53 -0600, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> Is there a better way to automate a signature compliance? To tweak >> what they have done? > Testing member function signatures for compliance is inherently > flawed, they just shouldn't do it. > > I would say they should be testing that the function can be called on > a non-const object and that it behaves as specified, rather than > testing for a specific signature. That's more or less how the RTEMS API signature tests work for C. We declare a variable of each type and pass it into the method including only the .h files POSIX says you should.
Thanks. -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985
