in reply to Re: Ignoring subs in Test::Pod::Coverage?
in thread Ignoring subs in Test::Pod::Coverage?
I totally overlooked private. Thanks choroba.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^3: Ignoring subs in Test::Pod::Coverage?
by marioroy (Prior) on Jul 01, 2017 at 22:52 UTC | |
Hi stevieb. Another way is prefixing the functions considered private with an underscore.
| [reply] [d/l] |
by stevieb (Canon) on Jul 01, 2017 at 23:11 UTC | |
Thanks marioroy, I've considered that, but that would require some structural changes to the XS (however, I'm not overly against doing so). Currently, I have my XSUBs loaded as they are direct from the C libraries themselves, when I don't need to wrap them again locally:
Other ones have full-blown C wrappers as stated, then the XSUB calls the actual function: Wrapper:
The wrapper in XS then calls the C function I'm wrapping with the manipulated arguments:
I've been 'learning' for a full year at this stuff amongst other things, but I'm no where near proficient. I have learned about using the PREFIX directive in my XS code, and that'll likely help. What I think is that preceeding everything with the Perl private notation may not work here very easily as there is a lot going on. I will play though. I've got everything exceptionally stable, all tests pass against everything, so I'm relatively content. I'm going to leave well enough alone for the time being, and poke my CI test software for a bit, to fix some issues there. This task can wait; I just thought another question wouldn't hurt here ;) Cheers, -stevieb ps. In the example given where I do trickery turning a perl aref into a char pointer, I know thanks to the Monks how to do that stuff with pack etc, I just haven't changed it yet. This XS trickery can be avoided, but I like to learn ;) | [reply] [d/l] [select] |