utils: Fix possible misuse of reflect.SliceHeader vet error when go 1.16.6 #139 #141
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
….16.6 radondb#139 [summary] fix go vet failed when go 1.16.6 [test case] utils/unsafe_test.go [patch codecov] utils/unsafe.go 100%
andyli029
force-pushed
the
fix_vet_1.16.6
branch
from
a39316b
to
1ccd649
Compare
andyli029
changed the title
acekingke
reviewed
Jul 14, 2021
|
LGTM |
zhl003
pushed a commit
to zhl003/radondb-mysql-kubernetes
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 17, 2022
utils: Fix possible misuse of reflect.SliceHeader vet error when go 1.16.6 radondb#139
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
[summary]
Fix possible misuse of reflect.SliceHeader vet error when go 1.16.6
[test case]
utils/unsafe_test.go
[patch codecov]
utils/unsafe.go 100%
What type of PR is this?
Which issue(s) this PR fixes?
Fixes #139
What this PR does?
Summary:
Special notes for your reviewer?