-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 647
Small fixes #3155
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
Small fixes #3155
Conversation
b1d5026 to
2026eb4
Compare
|
I just opened #3156 fixing missing |
|
Could you make a pull request only for 27ec7c8 and send it to https://github.com/universal-ctags/libreadtags/pulls ? |
23a6f97 to
6124bdf
Compare
|
Opened universal-ctags/libreadtags#34 for |
6124bdf to
e4a141e
Compare
|
I will cherry-pick the commits from this pull request incrementally. |
Or if you want me to open separate PRs for each commit then I can also do that. :) |
509e50e to
7f90b1e
Compare
|
I have a build question: Why don't I see Looks like we're missing |
I don't know or I cannot remember. Universal Ctags (u-ctags) was derived from Exuberant Ctags (e-ctags). e-ctags has its own debug infrastructure. On the other hand, u-ctags introduced a new debug-infra called "tracing". And now we are here. I often want to revise the debug-infra. However, I didn't. |
|
@masatake Thanks for the reply!
Answering my own question: We pass |
Return if index is `NO_PARSER_FIELD`
Found by: scan-build
`man vsprintf` suggests use of safer vsnprintf()
7f90b1e to
80c50eb
Compare
|
I'll look into tests failures tomorrow. |
|
The failure is reproduced even on my note pc (make tmain). Could you remove the pull request from the this pull request? Then make a separate pull request for |
I have not reviewed yet because it make the test on the CD
|
(Cherry picked from universal-ctags#3155.)
Check the Currently, if you have |
You are correct. I will cherry pick 80c50eb, too. Thank you. |
(Cherry picked from universal-ctags#3155.)
|
|
||
| Assert (tag); | ||
| Assert (index == NO_PARSER_FIELD || ((unsigned int)index) < tag->usedParserFields); | ||
| Assert (index == NO_PARSER_FIELD || (index >= 0 && ((unsigned int)index) < tag->usedParserFields)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This line makes sense.
| doesContainAnyChar = defaultDoesContainAnyChar; | ||
| } | ||
| if (index == NO_PARSER_FIELD) | ||
| return false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Your change doesn't consider the combination of index == NO_PARSER_FIELD and doesContainAnyChar != NULL.
|
Acceptable changes are already merged to the main tree. |
Found by: scan-build