From 80582ac5cefb6e2b1f2a63d65f4ce6b01a5d17eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Patrick Pelissier Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 00:59:33 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update as the minimum level of recursion is decreased --- tests/test-mcore.c | 9 ++++----- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/test-mcore.c b/tests/test-mcore.c index 4e125b6b..20e27410 100644 --- a/tests/test-mcore.c +++ b/tests/test-mcore.c @@ -264,7 +264,6 @@ static void test_let(void) assert(b); // Test of recursive INIT_WITH within M_LET - // We need to use M_APPLY_APIA / M_APPLY_APIB for this. #define OPL1 (TYPE(int), INIT_WITH(OPL1_F)) #define OPL1_F(d, x) ((d) = (x)) #define OPL2 (TYPE(int), INIT_WITH(API_1(OPL2_F)), OPLIST(OPL1) ) @@ -282,11 +281,11 @@ static void test_let(void) assert (x == 4585); M_LET( (x, 4586) , OPL2) assert (x == 4586); - M_LET( (x, 4587) , OPL3) - assert (x == 4587); - M_LET( (x, 4588) , OPL4) - assert (x == 4588); // TBC: Is it acceptable to use M_EVAL in this context? + M_EVAL( M_LET( (x, 4587) , OPL3) ) + assert (x == 4587); + M_EVAL( M_LET( (x, 4588) , OPL4) ) + assert (x == 4588); M_EVAL( M_LET( (x, 4589) , OPL5)) assert (x == 4589); M_EVAL(M_LET( (x, 4590) , OPL6))