Does anyone else think that "arguments" may not be the best name? Perhaps "argument_types" would be more suitable...
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Gregory Szorc <[email protected]>wrote: > I've refactored existing tests to use the new get_cursor(). I also changed > the implementation of get_cursor to support recursion. In a forthcoming > patch, I have added an argument to get_children() to recurse. Until then, > this suboptimal implementation can persist. > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 4:39 AM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Regarding the introduction of get_cursor(...): same as in the other >> patch: looks like a good idea, but then use that in the other tests, >> too. Also, like in the other patch, I'm still confused whether there's >> a scheme behind when you use ok_ and when you use assert... >> >> In general: very nice tests :) >> >> Cheers, >> /Manuel >> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Gregory Szorc <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > I incorporated feedback from Tobias and exposed arguments as an >> > iterable and indexable container object. >> > >> > --- >> > bindings/python/clang/cindex.py | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ >> > bindings/python/tests/cindex/test_type.py | 69 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > 2 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > cfe-commits mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> > >> > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
