Hi,
On 11/19/18 3:37 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Raw::xxx_NDX are initialized to 1 + previous_NDX. It's a general
good approach to increment the index but I find it error-prone and
hard to catch mistake since the (adjacent) variable names look
so alike. Perhaps some form of verification or assertion to ensure
the indices are correctly initialized.
>
Added a test that uses reflection to verify the uniqueness and sequence.
The test says:
* Check that the Raw._*_NDX indexes are sequential
and followed by the FIXED_LENGTH value.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
though the code does not verify that FIXED_LENGTH is the final value. I
don't know that it's all that important to do, but I thought I'd point
it out.
Thanks,
-Brent
