lmi-commits
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lmi-commits] [lmi] master 4ecdb09 4/6: Resolve a marked defect: duratio


From: Greg Chicares
Subject: [lmi-commits] [lmi] master 4ecdb09 4/6: Resolve a marked defect: duration keywords already tested [402]
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:20:57 +0000 (UTC)

branch: master
commit 4ecdb0988621a6f40abcae4ba6d19a4ae0b11781
Author: Gregory W. Chicares <address@hidden>
Commit: Gregory W. Chicares <address@hidden>

    Resolve a marked defect: duration keywords already tested [402]
    
    Explicitly specified terminal duration as "maturity" in this example
    for clarity, even though that keyword was already tested elsewhere.
    Aside from that, it's not obvious what the deleted comment meant.
    Perhaps its purpose was to suggest adding other duration keywords to
    this test, if any were ever added--but none have been.
---
 input_seq_test.cpp |    4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/input_seq_test.cpp b/input_seq_test.cpp
index ffc84cf..866658f 100644
--- a/input_seq_test.cpp
+++ b/input_seq_test.cpp
@@ -349,13 +349,11 @@ int test_main(int, char*[])
     check(__FILE__, __LINE__, d, n, e, "", k, c, w);
     }
 
-// TODO ?? Also test keyword as scalar duration.
-
     // Duration keywords: {retirement, maturity}
     {
     int const n = 10;
     double const d[n] = {7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4};
-    std::string const e("7, retirement; 4");
+    std::string const e("7, retirement; 4, maturity");
     check(__FILE__, __LINE__, d, n, e);
     InputSequence const seq("7, retirement; 4", 10, 90, 95, 0, 2002);
     std::vector<ValueInterval> const& i(seq.interval_representation());



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]