[erlang-patches] trivial bug in jinterface
Fredrik
fredrik@REDACTED
Fri Feb 1 12:05:30 CET 2013
On 02/01/2013 11:58 AM, Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
> Ok, thanks. This syntax is not described in the how-to, and it should
> probably be, because it's easier to not forget to update the default
> branch at github
>
> I updated the wiki with the following:
>
> Additionally include the following two links for viewing the changes:
> <pre>
> https://github.com/mygithub/otp/compare/erlang:BASE...my-cool-updates
> https://github.com/mygithub/otp/compare/erlang:BASE...my-cool-updates.patch
> </pre>
> where BASE should be the base branch, @maint@ or @master@REDACTED
>
> /Vlad
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Fredrik <fredrik@REDACTED
> <mailto:fredrik@REDACTED>> wrote:
>
> On 02/01/2013 11:37 AM, Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It already is on master (but I just had some git issues, so you
>> might have to refetch).
>>
>> /Vlad
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Fredrik <fredrik@REDACTED
>> <mailto:fredrik@REDACTED>> wrote:
>>
>> On 02/01/2013 11:13 AM, Nico Kruber wrote:
>>
>> On Friday 01 Feb 2013 09:58:54 Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I found a small problem in jinterface. It has been
>> around for a while now,
>> it happens in a corner case that probably nobody ever
>> uses.
>>
>> In OtpErlangTuple(OtpErlangObject[], int, int), when
>> the size of the slice
>> used is 0, then the elems fields remains
>> uninitialized, it is the parameter
>> that gets assigned.
>>
>> I used master as base, I hope it's still possible to
>> do that.
>>
>> git fetch git://github.com/vladdu/otp.git
>> <http://github.com/vladdu/otp.git> tuple_constructor_bug
>>
>> https://github.com/vladdu/otp/compare/tuple_constructor_bug
>> https://github.com/vladdu/otp/compare/tuple_constructor_bug.patch
>>
>> Given that there are no other tests for jinterface at
>> this level, do you
>> want me to write one for this case?
>>
>> best regards,
>> Vlad
>>
>> your branch is outdated so the diff is not clean, i.e.
>> contains a lot of other
>> commits
>> -> please rebase your branch
>> see https://github.com/erlang/otp/wiki/Submitting-patches
>>
>> it would probably also be good to base it on maint - but
>> someone from the otp
>> team needs to decide here :)
>>
>> your commit though seems reasonable
>> https://github.com/vladdu/otp/commit/ee29a8aa733fbf1a1666b2f85a9fd6ff19d777b3
>>
>>
>> Nico
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-patches mailing list
>> erlang-patches@REDACTED <mailto:erlang-patches@REDACTED>
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches
>>
>> Hello,
>> Just rebase it on master will work fine for me.
>>
>> --
>>
>> BR Fredrik Gustafsson
>> Erlang OTP Team
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-patches mailing list
>> erlang-patches@REDACTED <mailto:erlang-patches@REDACTED>
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches
>>
>>
> Re-fetched the patch, I don't remember how the how-to is
> describing on the comparison-links but you should write it like
> this instead
> https://github.com/vladdu/otp/compare/erlang:master...tuple_constructor_bug
> So,
> the branch you are based upon should be in the link
> ('erlang:master...' or when it is maint 'erlang:maint...').
> This will make a proper link for us to examine.
>
>
> --
>
> BR Fredrik Gustafsson
> Erlang OTP Team
>
>
Thanks, looks very understandable.
--
BR Fredrik Gustafsson
Erlang OTP Team
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-patches/attachments/20130201/17c8850e/attachment.htm>
More information about the erlang-patches
mailing list