the comment here indicates that the author knew it was an invalid api use
so it should not have been here in the first place
Signed-off-by: Mike Blumenkrantz <zmike@osg.samsung.com>
there is no check for the existence of this file so this will error most times
from it not existing
Signed-off-by: Mike Blumenkrantz <zmike@osg.samsung.com>
For numeric types, eina_value_set() accepts values instead of references
on the value to be set. Hence, we were affecting as the exit code of the
loop a garbage value, yielding to invalid results.
This is useless in py as Objects are never returned
directly, you always get the correct subtype (Class,
Variable, etc..). It was also clashing with Class.type
Two of the new tests are failing, the problem is that now
we have name clashes between Eolian_Object and Eolian_Class (at least)
For the moment I spotted:
- Object.name clash with Class.name
- Object.type clash with Class.type
Also fixed a typo in eolian_lib.py spotted by the new tests,
and removed the old tests for Declaration.
Summary:
They were still using the old SetSize(w, h) API instead of receiving
eina.Size2D structs.
Test Plan: Build examples and run them.
Reviewers: felipealmeida, cedric
Reviewed By: cedric
Subscribers: cedric
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D5830
Signed-off-by: Cedric BAIL <cedric@osg.samsung.com>
Summary:
C# does not have a literal form for structs (like C++'s {} aggregate
initialization). Before this commit the user would need to explicitly
instantiate a struct and assign the required values to it, like:
eina.Size2D size;
size.W = width;
size.H = height;
widget.SetSize(size);
As a workaround, this commit generates helper constructor with
parameters corresponding to the struct fields in the order they are
declared. These parameters have default values if one does not want to
explicitly initialize all fields directly. With these constructs, the
above code could be translated to:
widget.SetSize(new eina.Size2D(width, height));
It should be noted that the constructed struct will live on the managed
memory (GC) instead of the stack.
Test Plan: run "make check"
Reviewers: felipealmeida
Subscribers: cedric
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D5838
Signed-off-by: Cedric BAIL <cedric@osg.samsung.com>