-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Preprocessor target fix #31
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
16 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2d515bf
CPL-6730: normalize paths
spirsch c3639f0
CPL-6730: test renaming and added compiler specific skip marker
spirsch f24e396
removed explicit preprocessor target
spirsch d79d42f
Merge branch 'main' into Preprocessor-Target-Fix
spirsch 75b6509
remove preprocessor args for dependency finding
spirsch 722a764
added special handling for preprocessor args
spirsch 72dd778
Merge branch 'main' into Preprocessor-Target-Fix
spirsch 602e14d
improved testing via compiler specific markers
spirsch 03c9957
improved testing framework and fixed+covered more dependency finding …
spirsch c719e66
slight refactor and semaphore debugging improvements
spirsch 28f4f43
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into Preprocessor-Target-Fix
spirsch c5ce7a4
improved dependency finding
spirsch 305ae33
more log messages, proper handling of configparser error, added prepr…
spirsch e7cf871
log error if preprocessing fails silently
spirsch 4d33bf2
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into Preprocessor-Target-Fix
spirsch b4e5fa1
raise exception on preprocessor silent failure instead
spirsch File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ | |
|
|
||
| from homcc.common.arguments import Arguments | ||
| from homcc.common.compression import Compression | ||
| from configparser import ConfigParser, SectionProxy | ||
| from configparser import ConfigParser, Error, SectionProxy | ||
| from homcc.common.logging import LogLevel | ||
| from homcc.common.parsing import HOMCC_CONFIG_FILENAME, default_locations, parse_configs | ||
| from homcc.client.errors import HostParsingError, NoHostsFoundError | ||
|
|
@@ -399,7 +399,11 @@ def filtered_lines(text: str) -> List[str]: | |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def parse_config(filenames: List[Path] = None) -> ClientConfig: | ||
| cfg: ConfigParser = parse_configs(filenames or default_locations(HOMCC_CONFIG_FILENAME)) | ||
| try: | ||
| cfg: ConfigParser = parse_configs(filenames or default_locations(HOMCC_CONFIG_FILENAME)) | ||
| except Error as err: | ||
| print(f"{err}; using default configuration instead") | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do we have to use
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Exactly, yes! |
||
| return ClientConfig() | ||
|
|
||
| if HOMCC_CLIENT_CONFIG_SECTION not in cfg.sections(): | ||
| return ClientConfig() | ||
|
|
||
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we manually call
__exit__? Shouldn't becloseenough?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need either
releaseor__exit__(implicitreleasevia provided context manager) here.My thoughts here were, that if in newer versions of the
posix_ipclibrary__exit__implies more work or better exception handling that we already support it with this implementation. However, since we currently have to use a fixed version of the library we can cross-check with that particular implementation. Basically, I don't mind either approach.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, I think its fine. Was just wondering if it has any particular reasoning, but I guess relying on the context manager behavior is fine