Skip to content
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

Review checklist: suggest checking insertions expected to be new. #7245

Merged

Conversation

jimblandy
Copy link
Member

Suggest checking that PRs assert that insertions into sets or maps expected to be adding new values didn't actually just replace some existing value.

Bug #7048 and its several duplicates would have been caught sooner if the insertion of the new spill temporary into the spilled_composites table had asserted that there was no existing spill variable for that expression.

I don't have strong feelings about this, just a thought.

Suggest checking that PRs assert that insertions into sets or maps
expected to be adding new values didn't actually just replace some
existing value.

Bug gfx-rs#7048 and its several duplicates would have been caught sooner if
the insertion of the new spill temporary into the `spilled_composites`
table had asserted that there was no existing spill variable for that
expression.
@jimblandy jimblandy requested a review from a team as a code owner February 27, 2025 21:52
Copy link
Member

@cwfitzgerald cwfitzgerald left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good idea

@cwfitzgerald cwfitzgerald merged commit 3297e9f into gfx-rs:trunk Feb 28, 2025
34 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants