Skip to content

Add test for GetFunctionUsingArgs #106

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

sudo-panda
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

vgvassilev and others added 25 commits May 24, 2023 07:15
This patch also teaches InterOp to pass down arguments directly to llvm. For
example -mllvm -debug-only=jitlink to subscribe for debug output for a specific
debug type.
This patch fixes several asserts in clang-repl mode.
That's a quite often used idiom in C which hides the implementation details of
the underlying tag declaration.
This patch removes the external calls to getInterpreter/getSema in favor of
storing them as static variables. That improves the ABI resilience of the API.
…ation

- Added Comments (Function Definitions) for CppInterOp Doxygen documentation

- Incorporated minor changes in Interop.cpp and InterOp.h, as suggested   in Vassil's review

- changes to preamble section reverted

- the "this pointer" term reverted

- Made sentence openings consistent (e.g., Identifies > Checks)

- Executed `git-clang-format` in InterOp.cpp and InterOp.h
- Added CppInterOp Intro writeup
- Removed (previously LibInterOp)
- Broke the lines at 80 columns (except code snippets)
- Worked with Krishna to add improved Build Instructions

Co-Authored-By: Krishna Narayanan <[email protected]>
This patch should fix the valgrind issues.
@sudo-panda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wlav InterOp::GetFunctionUsingArgs (yet to be implemented) is going to substitute Cppyy::GetMethodTemplate. Can you suggest any more test cases that could be added to the test?

@vgvassilev
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed in the last meeting we had to do some renaming. GitHub decided to close this PR probably because we rewrote our history. Can you reopen the PR against the new version of main?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants