Skip to content

Conversation

@NotAShelf
Copy link
Owner

Expand our test coverage. I wish there was a way to assign a numeric value to our coverage besides codecov.

Signed-off-by: NotAShelf raf@notashelf.dev
Change-Id: I7f97d3f96116182a44a60e0b00ba61636a6a6964

Signed-off-by: NotAShelf <raf@notashelf.dev>
Change-Id: I7f97d3f96116182a44a60e0b00ba61636a6a6964
Definitely not enough, and *definitely* not comprehensive enough but
should cover a wide range of issues I managed to run into. And by
"managed to run into" I mean to convey how unsafe the C API really is.

Signed-off-by: NotAShelf <raf@notashelf.dev>
Change-Id: I027040e17e6eae0d9bf3afc7ec9587ab6a6a6964
I think the main reason we'll use those bindings is to register new
primops without having to patch Nix. Surely the use cases will differ
but this is one of the more "surface level" applications of the
bindings. Let's test registering primops thoroughly so that it does not
come bite us in the ass later.

This is also generously documented to serve as somewhat of a
documentation since I *don't* want to write documentation manually for
everyting, especially since the API will keep changing as I update the
Nix version used to generate the bindings.

Signed-off-by: NotAShelf <raf@notashelf.dev>
Change-Id: Iddca7a2388679961a41fca68d4514f0c6a6a6964
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