Add edge definition API #437
Conversation
| @@ -568,6 +565,24 @@ struct Port { | |||
|
|
|||
| [[nodiscard]] constexpr static bool isOptional() noexcept { return kIsOptional; } | |||
|
|
|||
| [[nodiscard]] constexpr std::size_t nReaders() const noexcept { | |||
| if constexpr (kIsInput) { | |||
| return -1UZ; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was wondering if this should/could be a runtime or compile time error(the function only defined for Outputs)? Compile time error probably won't work because of the virtual interface and use in the runtime API, runtime error does not work because of noexcept. Would it be useful to have an assert(false)?
Functionally I think this is good, but it kind of communicates that the user will have to check the number of readers against MAX_SIZE_T which in my understanding of the code should never happen -> it's e.g. sufficient to check for edge.readers > 0 to check for presence of readers.
Ties a bit into the bigger discussion on how we handle errors in general, so this is probably not really actionable right here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
assert(false) would be ok, but I'm not sure we should do it. As this is a general/unified interface, I'm more for communicating the error as -1 - the user is not going to need to first check the type of the port and then call the functions, just call and ignore -1 if that is the result.
| if constexpr (kIsInput) { | ||
| return _ioHandler.buffer().n_writers(); | ||
| } else { | ||
| return -1UZ; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why, -1UZ? Why not 0, or, if this is considered an error, add a failing static_assert?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See reply to Alex above
Signed-off-by: Ivan Čukić <[email protected]>
ivan-cukic
force-pushed
the
ivan/edge-api
branch
from
9670a1d
to
f0c99a8
Compare
No description provided.