-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Clean Obsolete protection against C++11 syntax #12672
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @VinInn (Vincenzo Innocente) for CMSSW_8_0_X. It involves the following packages: Alignment/ReferenceTrajectories @civanch, @diguida, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @monttj, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @Dr15Jones, @cerminar, @slava77, @vadler, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. Following commands in first line of a comment are recognized
|
@cmsbuild, please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
||
const BasicReferenceCounted& operator=( const BasicReferenceCounted& ) { | ||
BasicReferenceCounted& operator=( const BasicReferenceCounted& ) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why did the const go away?
is it generally const-safe when used outside
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Removing const is the proper thing to do since that is really the signature expected by C++. Besides, the member function isn't const anyway.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The syntax of an assign operator is this one.
All this exists because reference counted objects may also be used as normal objects.
Otherwise we can simply delete copy and assignment if used only in refcoutingpointers...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK.
I suppose no regressions were observed. |
-1 Tested at: daa30c3 ---> test testRecoMETMETProducers had ERRORS you can see the results of the tests here: |
not me
I have not detected any regression |
@davidlange6 , I propose to merge as is |
+1
We should probably have an IB with this PR first before just pushing in a pre-release. |
+1 |
Clean Obsolete protection against C++11 syntax
It passed the Matrix... is it the only error? do not see any obvious reason... |
i don’t see any reason either… but thought I’d ask - this is the only new error - maybe it was a glitch…
|
I looked at the configuration for the failing workflow. A Producer labelled 'ecalFixedAlphaBetaFitUncalibRecHit' is in the configuration but I don't think it appears on any of the run paths since no module with that label is created in the job (as determined by using Tracer service). I noticed this configuration use the 'reconstructonCosmics' sequence. Maybe that one has a problem? |
purely syntactic. In principle even the post-processed code shall be identical