Ruby: Improve support for explicit proc-creation #13612
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
alexrford
previously approved these changes
Jun 29, 2023
hvitved
previously approved these changes
Jun 29, 2023
|
There's a large regression in |
asgerf
force-pushed
the
rb/api-graph-explicit-proc-lambda
branch
from
c108f38 to
18762db
Compare
|
The latest evaluation shows some failures which will need investigation before we merge this. Edit: looks like the evaluation was performed without the RAM fix. Will need to run another evaluation with an updated DCA. |
|
Evaluation looks fine now |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Proc.newas an explicit lambda creation, alongsideprocandlambdacalls.Should fix the issue brought up here: https://github.com/github/codeql/pull/13483/files#diff-4eabe9f52cd51fcb0f830d178af3fb1a36df1e623ae2acbf4a2b25f968e9ee7fR25