==================================================================
Known Issues with the Current Implementation of the RoSA Framework
==================================================================

.. contents::
   :local:

TODO
====

* Project logo - `docs/_themes/rosa-theme/static/logo.png`
* License?
* Packaging with
  `CPack <https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/module/CPack.html>`_.
* What about design documentation on the basics of RoSA?
* What about testing the framework?

Known Issues
============

* CMake

  * VS2017 generates intermediate files for the `ZERO_CHECK` project out of the
    build directory, see `CMake issue #16458`_.

* C++

  * Mangled names of function pointers with non-throwing exception specification
    in function signature will change in C++17. That renders binaries generated
    with C++14 and C++17 incompatible (for linking).

    * Since version 4.0.0, Clang warns about this compatibility issue as part
      of `-Wc++1z-compat`. That warning is turned off in the build scripts.
    * The langauge standard for building RoSA libraries and applications needs
      to be lockstepped: now use C++14 only and step to C++17 later when it is
      properly supported by all major compilers.

* Doxygen

  * "Potential recursive class relation" is detected for `rosa::GenSeq`, which
    is true if one ignores the template specialization for the terminal case.
    It would be nice not to have this pointless warning.

* clang-tidy

  * Clang-tidy reports warnings about `noexcept` marking for the move
    constructor and move assignment operator of `rosa::Optional` in some
    situations when the template with the non-specialized argument list is used
    -- for example, in the file `example/deluxe-interface/deluxe-interface.cpp`.
    However, the condition for the `noexcept` marking should be met and the
    warning is pointless.

.. _CMake issue #16458: https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/issues/16458