Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2410 +/- ##
======================================
Coverage 91.3% 91.3%
======================================
Files 62 62
Lines 12027 12027
======================================
Hits 10981 10981
Misses 1046 1046
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
mattdowle
requested review from
MarkusBonsch and
st-pasha
and removed request for
MarkusBonsch and
st-pasha
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Patch is already on CRAN. This PR moves the NEWS entries back into a new 1.10.4-1 section and implements two fixes in the patch that weren't in master :
Closes #2330 : CRAN maintainers needed this to pass R-devel
Closes #2137 : Attempted fix of the fork-after-threads problem. It's specific to the CRAN Mac binary using Intel's OpenMP so I attempted a fix in the patch and we'll need Mac users to test the CRAN package binary. If not, we'll have to raise the problem with Intel.
I'm no longer sure there was a problem with the union method of type punning, so I've reverted to union and changed long long to int64_t. If CRAN shows problems again like last time, I'll think again.
Although 1.10.4-1 is passing on CRAN much better (it was in error state on every instance), a second patch is now on CRAN: 1.10.4-2