You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the generated Java code, the Order member TransactTm ends in a lower-case "m", but in the constructor you access it as TransactTM ending in a capital "M".
In C# and C++, a class Foo must not have a member that's also called Foo. Thus this C# line and this C++ line (and probably more) will give compile errors.
The C++ code won't compile because of multiple reasons. And defining everything including constructors in a header is a no-no anyway.
So is the goal generating code that actually compiles and works, or is being syntactically similar to Java/C#/C++ enough?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The transformation should generate correct code. The C++ code
for test1 does compile correctly under Visual Studio, apart from the
Tm/TM problem.
Kevin
From: Tassilo Horn [email protected]
Sent: 26 March 2014 10:01
To: TransformationToolContest/ttc2014-fixml
Cc: Lano, Kevin
Subject: [ttc2014-fixml] Bugs in the generated sample code (#6)
In the generated Java code, the Order member TransactTmhttps://github.com/TransformationToolContest/ttc2014-fixml/blob/master/test_cases/test1java.txt#L4 ends in a lower-case "m", but in the constructorhttps://github.com/TransformationToolContest/ttc2014-fixml/blob/master/test_cases/test1java.txt#L17 you access it as TransactTM ending in a capital "M".
In C#, a class Foo must not have a member that's also called Foo. Thus this linehttps://github.com/TransformationToolContest/ttc2014-fixml/blob/master/test_cases/test2csharp.txt#L163 (and probably more) will give compile errors.
The C++ code won't compile because of multiple reasons. And defining everything including constructors in a header is a no-no anyway.
So is the goal generating code that actually compiles and works, or is being syntactically similar to Java/C#/C++ enough?
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/6.
In the generated Java code, the
Order
member TransactTm ends in a lower-case "m", but in the constructor you access it asTransactTM
ending in a capital "M".In C# and C++, a class
Foo
must not have a member that's also calledFoo
. Thus this C# line and this C++ line (and probably more) will give compile errors.The C++ code won't compile because of multiple reasons. And defining everything including constructors in a header is a no-no anyway.
So is the goal generating code that actually compiles and works, or is being syntactically similar to Java/C#/C++ enough?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: