Allow dependency resolution when base's and derivative's features conflict#199
Merged
giacomofiorin merged 2 commits intomasterfrom Dec 14, 2018
Merged
Allow dependency resolution when base's and derivative's features conflict#199giacomofiorin merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
giacomofiorin merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
Conversation
Allows the dependency resolution to be performed after object construction, thus allowing features to be set by derivative classes before it.
Member
Author
|
I accidentally submitted the PR while editing the description, but it's updated now. |
This was referenced Feb 7, 2019
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 is done by overriding conflicting features in a base CVC's constructor in the derivative CVC's constructor, but calling
init_cvc_features()only after the constructor chain is invoked.Fixes the problem observed by @joeyelk and discussed in the comment of issue #184.