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
The sml::variant<>must match the implicit ordering of the sml::sm.state_ member, or the wrong state will be decoded (as there is no causal relationship between an instanced sml::variant<> and the implicitly instanced sml::variant<> in the state machine sml::sm<> class)
The following diff illustrates this issue, by simply reordering the <s1, s2> types in the NTEST self-test (which then breaks the NTEST).
I'm at a loss as how to work around this given the current SMLv3 architecture (as at sml::overload{} constructor time, the sml::sm<> class doesn't exist).
The
sml::variant<>
must match the implicit ordering of the sml::sm.state_ member, or the wrong state will be decoded (as there is no causal relationship between an instanced sml::variant<> and the implicitly instanced sml::variant<> in the state machine sml::sm<> class)The following diff illustrates this issue, by simply reordering the <s1, s2> types in the NTEST self-test (which then breaks the NTEST).
I'm at a loss as how to work around this given the current SMLv3 architecture (as at sml::overload{} constructor time, the sml::sm<> class doesn't exist).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: