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

C++11-ify virtualisation in Nanostack classes #12488

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2020

Conversation

kjbracey
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of changes

Use override and final where appropriate, and eliminate unnecessary
virtual.

Some other C++11 simplifications.

Eliminate two unused header files (with no corresponding source files).

Reduces code size.

Impact of changes

None.

Migration actions required

None.

Documentation

None.


Pull request type

[X] Patch update (Bug fix / Target update / Docs update / Test update / Refactor)
[] Feature update (New feature / Functionality change / New API)
[] Major update (Breaking change E.g. Return code change / API behaviour change)

Test results

[] No Tests required for this change (E.g docs only update)
[X] Covered by existing mbed-os tests (Greentea or Unittest)
[] Tests / results supplied as part of this PR

Reviewers

@mikaleppanen


Verified

This commit was signed with the committer’s verified signature.
pietroalbini Pietro Albini
Use `override` and `final` where appropriate, and eliminate unnecessary
`virtual`.

Some other C++11 simplifications.

Eliminate two unused header files (with no corresponding source files).

Reduces code size.
@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested review from mikaleppanen and a team February 21, 2020 14:00
@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

@kjbracey-arm, thank you for your changes.
@mikaleppanen @ARMmbed/mbed-os-ipcore @ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers please review.

#include "MeshInterfaceNanostack.h"
#include "NanostackEthernetPhy.h"

class NanostackEMACInterface : public Nanostack::Interface {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

By this and the other removed class/headers do we make it a breaking change?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@kjbracey kjbracey Feb 25, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't believe there are any breaking changes for "real code" here.

These two header files were a stray remnant of a design that wasn't followed through, and committed by mistake - the corresponding cpp files were missing, so the classes weren't constructible.

It would technically be a breaking change if someone had been including the files for no reason.

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Feb 26, 2020

CI started

@mergify mergify bot added needs: CI and removed needs: review labels Feb 26, 2020
@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Feb 26, 2020

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 9 of 9 test jobs passed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

@0xc0170 0xc0170 merged commit 3739ccd into ARMmbed:master Feb 27, 2020
@mergify mergify bot removed the ready for merge label Feb 27, 2020
@kjbracey kjbracey deleted the override_ns branch February 28, 2020 11:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants