codegen conditional on hasmethod

[cscherrer]

No description provided.

[cscherrer]

Currently passing everything except precompilation. Here's the error:

caching with precompilation: Test Failed at /home/chad/git/KeywordCalls/test/runtests.jl:86
  Expression: Precompile2.test() == (a = 2, b = 1)
   Evaluated: (b = 1, a = 2) == (a = 2, b = 1)
Stacktrace:
 [1] macro expansion
   @ ~/git/KeywordCalls/test/runtests.jl:86 [inlined]
 [2] macro expansion
   @ /buildworker/worker/package_linux64/build/usr/share/julia/stdlib/v1.6/Test/src/Test.jl:1151 [inlined]
 [3] top-level scope
   @ ~/git/KeywordCalls/test/runtests.jl:86
Test Summary:               | Fail  Total
caching with precompilation |    1      1
ERROR: LoadError: Some tests did not pass: 0 passed, 1 failed, 0 errored, 0 broken.
in expression starting at /home/chad/git/KeywordCalls/test/runtests.jl:85
ERROR: Package KeywordCalls errored during testing

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #18 (3641aed) into master (96b14dc) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head 3641aed differs from pull request most recent head df043d5. Consider uploading reports for the commit df043d5 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##            master       #18   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files            1         1           
  Lines           42        61   +19     
=========================================
+ Hits            42        61   +19     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/KeywordCalls.jl	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 96b14dc...df043d5. Read the comment docs.

[cscherrer]

Think it's working, what do you think @mileslucas ?

[cscherrer]

Just to be clear, this doesn't yet address #17 , but only #16

[mileslucas]

Looks good to me. The only catch I can think of is the case where someone has defined e.g., foo(::NamedTuple) outside of the @kwcall macro. Basically hasmethod has no way to know who wrote the preceding method. I think that's fair, especially if its pointed out somewhere in the docs.

[cscherrer]

Great point, I've updated the docstrings