Is there a bug in bit_array's sub function?

[james-ray]

• Updated all relevant documentation in docs
• Updated all code comments where relevant
• Wrote tests
• Updated CHANGELOG_PENDING.md
  This is original code:
  if bA.Bits > o.Bits {
  c := bA.copy()
  for i := 0; i < len(o.Elems)-1; i++ {
  c.Elems[i] &= ^c.Elems[i]
  }
  i := len(o.Elems) - 1
  if i >= 0 {
  for idx := i * 64; idx < o.Bits; idx++ {
  c.setIndex(idx, c.getIndex(idx) && !o.getIndex(idx))
  }
  }
  return c
  }

this part,
c := bA.copy()
for i := 0; i < len(o.Elems)-1; i++ {
c.Elems[i] &= ^c.Elems[i]
}
I don't understand, is it wrong?

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #2506 into develop will increase coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop   #2506      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage    61.35%   61.4%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          197     197              
  Lines        16453   16496      +43     
==========================================
+ Hits         10094   10129      +35     
- Misses        5504    5514      +10     
+ Partials       855     853       -2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
libs/common/bit_array.go	79.49% <100%> (+0.83%)	⬆️
blockchain/reactor.go	39.44% <0%> (+0.33%)	⬆️
blockchain/pool.go	66.43% <0%> (+0.69%)	⬆️
consensus/reactor.go	74.28% <0%> (+1.16%)	⬆️
libs/db/remotedb/remotedb.go	41.52% <0%> (+4.68%)	⬆️

[melekes]

🍰 🌮 🍉

[ValarDragon]

Great catch! The reason this didn't fail before is because our tests never covered this case. I think this function and the associated tests are far too complex, and should be radically simplified in another PR though.

[james-ray]

I'm sorry but I found in the CHANGELOG_PENDING.md . The contributor' name is wrong.

• [common/bit_array] Fixed a bug in the Sub function (@bradyjoestar)

It's not me. Would you please kindly modify it to me? Many thanks.

[melekes]

Oops, thank you for telling us! Fixed.

[james-ray]

I'm really sorry. But would you please modify this line for me too?
Special thanks to external contributors on this release:
@ goolAdapter, @ bradyjoestar

[ValarDragon]

We actually handle that line when building the release! So don't worry, we'll get it :) (Theres several more people missing from that atm)