Issue 15233 - TypeTuple causes segfault in dmd 2.68.2 #5226
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
|
Can we please not have a 20 line fix mixed in with 130 lines of refactoring? |
|
@WalterBright I'm fixing bug-prone COW manipulation code. |
|
Some amount of refactoring is acceptable in a PR. But not an amount that completely overwhelms and obscures the fix, which is the case here. I see the fix is the first commit - THAT should be this PR. I've posted the reasoning for this before. |
`keysx` and `valuesx` should be copied in synchronization with each other.
|
@WalterBright OK... I removed refactor only commits. |
|
thanks. |
WalterBright
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 27, 2015
Issue 15233 - TypeTuple causes segfault in dmd 2.68.2
|
@WalterBright I opened a new PR #5236 to do refactorings. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15233
It was a bug of Copy On Write manipulation in
TupleExp.interpret.At the same time check other COW manipulations in CTFE, and made them simplify.