-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 988
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Assertion failure in wb::side_actions_container::erase #1841
Labels
Bug
Issues involving unexpected behavior.
Whiteboard
Issues with the Planning Mode (a.k.a. Whiteboard) feature.
Comments
gfgtdf
added
Bug
Issues involving unexpected behavior.
Whiteboard
Issues with the Planning Mode (a.k.a. Whiteboard) feature.
labels
Jul 17, 2017
the log said '__assert_fail', usually asserts have an erromessage, maybe you coudl try to get the erromessage aswell ? |
Ok confirmed, the erromessage is side_action.cpp#L229 |
i couldn't reprduce this anymore in 1.14.0 |
gfgtdf
added a commit
to gfgtdf/wesnoth
that referenced
this issue
Apr 30, 2018
i don't really know why the old code had a special case for `get_turn(next) != turn_of_position`, from what i see `turn_end(0)` would basicially return the same value as `next`. The new code removes that special case which resulted in assertion failures before (wesnoth#1841) and also consiers the case `position` appears multiple times in `turn_beginnings_`
gfgtdf
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 30, 2018
i don't really know why the old code had a special case for `get_turn(next) != turn_of_position`, from what i see `turn_end(0)` would basicially return the same value as `next`. The new code removes that special case which resulted in assertion failures before (#1841) and also consiers the case where `position` appears multiple times in `turn_beginnings_`
fixed in fd5fdd8 |
Vultraz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 3, 2018
i don't really know why the old code had a special case for `get_turn(next) != turn_of_position`, from what i see `turn_end(0)` would basicially return the same value as `next`. The new code removes that special case which resulted in assertion failures before (#1841) and also consiers the case where `position` appears multiple times in `turn_beginnings_`
jostephd
pushed a commit
to jostephd/wesnoth
that referenced
this issue
Oct 6, 2018
i don't really know why the old code had a special case for `get_turn(next) != turn_of_position`, from what i see `turn_end(0)` would basicially return the same value as `next`. The new code removes that special case which resulted in assertion failures before (wesnoth#1841) and also consiers the case where `position` appears multiple times in `turn_beginnings_`
jostephd
pushed a commit
to jostephd/wesnoth
that referenced
this issue
Oct 7, 2018
i don't really know why the old code had a special case for `get_turn(next) != turn_of_position`, from what i see `turn_end(0)` would basicially return the same value as `next`. The new code removes that special case which resulted in assertion failures before (wesnoth#1841) and also consiers the case where `position` appears multiple times in `turn_beginnings_` (cherry-picked from commit 195913f)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug
Issues involving unexpected behavior.
Whiteboard
Issues with the Planning Mode (a.k.a. Whiteboard) feature.
Wesnoth 1.13.8 has crashed, so I built the current master (d02be2a) to investigate. The OS is Linux.
This save https://s3.amazonaws.com/orivej/bugs/wesnoth/HaT-Los_elfos_asediados-Guardado_autom%C3%A1tico7.gz reliably crashes the game if I:
y
)May be related to #1595
Backtrace:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: