Skip to content
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

Remove boost dependency #349

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Sep 3, 2019
Merged

Remove boost dependency #349

merged 6 commits into from Sep 3, 2019

Conversation

@eddyashton
Copy link
Contributor

@eddyashton eddyashton commented Sep 3, 2019

CCF doesn't depend on Boost - remove it from ansible playbooks, and references elsewhere.

Eddy Ashton added 2 commits Sep 3, 2019
@eddyashton eddyashton requested a review from microsoft/ccf as a code owner Sep 3, 2019
@cimetrics
Copy link

@cimetrics cimetrics commented Sep 3, 2019

images

@codecov-io
Copy link

@codecov-io codecov-io commented Sep 3, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #349 into master will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #349      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   79.77%   79.73%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         110      110              
  Lines        8565     8565              
==========================================
- Hits         6832     6829       -3     
- Misses       1733     1736       +3
Flag Coverage Δ
#e2e 72.09% <ø> (-0.08%) ⬇️
#unit 70.59% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/node/rpc/managementfrontend.h 65.63% <0%> (-3.13%) ⬇️
src/kv/kv.h 86.8% <0%> (-0.29%) ⬇️
@@ -57,7 +57,6 @@ ExperimentalAutoDetectBinPacking: false
FixNamespaceComments: false
ForEachMacros:
- Q_FOREACH

This comment has been minimized.

@achamayou

achamayou Sep 3, 2019
Member

Do we use Q_FOREACH? That looks like a Qt thing. I assume we can get rid of it too?

This comment has been minimized.

@eddyashton

eddyashton Sep 3, 2019
Author Contributor

Yup, removed.

This comment has been minimized.

@eddyashton

eddyashton Sep 3, 2019
Author Contributor

Ah, nope. Turns out that removing this messes with formatting of our foreach functions:

static int foreach (lua_State* l)

UD::unbox(l, -2)->foreach ([l, ifunc](const K& k, const V& v)

These are methods where we want without a space (rather than the for () space). It seems that having any value here is sufficient, but I think it's best to leave a useful value (Q_FOREACH) rather than random junk?

This comment has been minimized.

@eddyashton

eddyashton Sep 3, 2019
Author Contributor

Have gone with FOREACH rather than suggesting Qt support.

@cimetrics
Copy link

@cimetrics cimetrics commented Sep 3, 2019

images

@cimetrics
Copy link

@cimetrics cimetrics commented Sep 3, 2019

images

Eddy Ashton added 2 commits Sep 3, 2019
@cimetrics
Copy link

@cimetrics cimetrics commented Sep 3, 2019

images

@eddyashton eddyashton merged commit 8b83e8f into master Sep 3, 2019
5 checks passed
5 checks passed
LGTM analysis: Python No code changes detected
Details
CCF GitHub Pages #20190903.18 succeeded
Details
CCF Github CI #20190903.19 succeeded
Details
CCF Github CI - No SGX #20190903.16 succeeded
Details
license/cla All CLA requirements met.
Details
@eddyashton eddyashton deleted the remove_boost branch Sep 3, 2019
eddyashton pushed a commit to eddyashton/CCF that referenced this pull request Mar 24, 2020
* Remove boost from ansible

* Remove unused boost references

* Add dockerignore, remove clang-format Q_FOREACH

* Restore Q_FOREACH

* Non-specific FOREACH macro
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.