-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.6k
fix the bug in PR #21620 correctly #22282
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
Conversation
would be good if the commit message briefly described what either the bug or the fix was |
Looks like this may still have some issues: See this comment in Feather.jl #46 |
@tkelman could you please suggest a new commit message rather than just asking for rework. In general, I strongly agree that commit messages should be more descriptive of the bug than an issue number. In this case, I just didn't have much more to say. |
What was the bug? Uninitialized memory of some kind, going by the reduction of #22256? I didn't author the diff here, I don't know enough about what was wrong or what these lines of code are supposed to be doing vs what they were doing to come up with a summary for you - I trust you're capable of doing so if you try to. |
Something like "fix bug in |
…n field types don't depend on parameters fixes the bug in PR #21620 correctly
The bug is that PR #21620 would have caused Julia to crash if it had included a test. Somewhat surprising how little this code path gets used! |
fix #22256