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

api: dotnet: expose oneBitsList #329

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 16, 2021

Conversation

f1nzer
Copy link
Collaborator

@f1nzer f1nzer commented Feb 16, 2021

oneBitsList was not mapped in dotnet

related java issue: #191

ps: also added necessary gitignore patterns for dotnet tools

Copy link
Collaborator

@MysterionRise MysterionRise left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks fine by me. Need to introduce CI for .NET tests later

@MysterionRise MysterionRise merged commit 5c4d9d4 into epam:master Feb 16, 2021
@f1nzer f1nzer deleted the feature/dotnet-expose-onebitslist branch February 16, 2021 10:49
@@ -1694,6 +1694,11 @@ public string check2(string type)
return dispatcher.checkResult(IndigoLib.indigoCheckObj2(self, type));
}

public IndigoObject fingerprint()
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we have real demand for such method (except in test, where no problem to pass null)?

Assert.AreEqual(
"1698 1719 1749 1806 1909 1914 1971 2056",
indigoObject.fingerprint().oneBitsList(),
"same one bits as in string 1698 1719 1749 1806 1909 1914 1971 205");
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why missed the last 6 in the string? (205 instead 2056)
Here and in the referred Java pull request (apparently copy-pasted).

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, my bad.
Imho this data shouldn't be mentioned in the message parameter.

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.

4 participants