Fix missing "grpc name" from two RFmx restricted functions #1053
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
paulolamas18
requested review from
reckenro,
astarche and
maxxboehme
as code owners
ThangamV-NI
approved these changes
Apr 16, 2024
reckenro
approved these changes
Apr 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this Pull Request accomplish?
Two RFmx functions that were added recently don't comply with the grpc instrument name. This causes issues with automated tooling like in this PR https://dev.azure.com/ni/DevCentral/_git/ni-central/pullrequest/620589
Why should this Pull Request be merged?
The rest of the RFmx API follows this grpc name convention.
What testing has been done?
Visually inspected the generated proto file for the expected session name adjustment.