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

Add iec559 double definition check #115

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

armallen
Copy link

@armallen armallen commented Oct 4, 2023

Rationale

We need to check double type definition for ASIL purposes. This adds a simple check, then called by integrity_core_common (or any library needing to check double definition)

Related PRs

swift-nav/cmake#169
https://github.com/swift-nav/orion-engine/pull/7226

@armallen armallen marked this pull request as draft October 4, 2023 15:24
@armallen armallen changed the title iec559 test Add iec559 double definition check Oct 5, 2023
@armallen armallen marked this pull request as ready for review October 5, 2023 17:50
Copy link
Contributor

@jungleraptor jungleraptor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm a little confused about how this is supposed to work.

I'm actually surprised that the build didn't complain about making a cc_binary a dep of cc_library - that's probably the first warning sign.

In any case this is a runtime failure so I don't see how this will fail the build if the compiler is indeed not compatible.

Can we make this check constexpr instead so that it actually fails at compile time?

@armallen armallen marked this pull request as draft October 6, 2023 05:26
@armallen
Copy link
Author

armallen commented Oct 6, 2023

I'm a little confused about how this is supposed to work.

I'm actually surprised that the build didn't complain about making a cc_binary a dep of cc_library - that's probably the first warning sign.

In any case this is a runtime failure so I don't see how this will fail the build if the compiler is indeed not compatible.

Can we make this check constexpr instead so that it actually fails at compile time?

🤦 sorry about this, I think we'll go for a static assert in the library instead

@armallen armallen closed this Nov 22, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants