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

Add muparser in some of our Builds #3695

Closed
vicentebolea opened this issue Jul 11, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

Add muparser in some of our Builds #3695

vicentebolea opened this issue Jul 11, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
area: ci Continuous Integration issues

Comments

@vicentebolea
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@vicentebolea vicentebolea added the area: ci Continuous Integration issues label Jul 11, 2023
@vicentebolea vicentebolea changed the title Add Muparser in soem of our Builds Add Muparser in some of our Builds Jul 11, 2023
@vicentebolea vicentebolea changed the title Add Muparser in some of our Builds Add muparser in some of our Builds Jul 11, 2023
@vicentebolea
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@guj @lizdulac do we still need this?

@guj
Copy link
Contributor

guj commented Jul 11, 2023

My code is in my "queryDerived" branch. I put in a version of muParser in the toolkit/query/. So no need to import it. This branch is not merged to master yet. Before Liz finishes her parser, It can serve as a backup if Scott wants a demo.

So short answer is no need to add muparser in any builds. Whether to merge this branch to master is up to you.

@anagainaru
Copy link
Contributor

Liz's version will not use muParser but her own grammar. I assume we'll want to use the same to parse @guj expression from the XML eventually so I don't think we'll need muParser in our builds

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area: ci Continuous Integration issues
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants