Update type of id param to IDTYPE in swig wrapper. #433
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This potentially improves forward compatibility in the case that IDTYPE is changed in the underlying cgraph.h file. Co-authored-by: Dan Schult <dschult@colgate.edu>
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #433 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 80.89% 80.89%
=======================================
Files 5 5
Lines 1256 1256
=======================================
Hits 1016 1016
Misses 240 240 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This potentially improves forward compatibility in the case that
IDTYPE is changed in the underlying cgraph.h file.
This may have different impacts on different platforms depending on whether
longis 32-bit or 64-bit (i.e. windows vs. everyone else). I guess let's see what CI says...FWIW I'm not sure I'd include this in the 1.10 release, at least without a test showing a specific failure resulting from the "wrong" type.
Closes #174