Skip to content

Fix constant propagator merge operator#1057

Closed
peterschrammel wants to merge 3 commits intodiffblue:masterfrom
peterschrammel:fix-constant-propagator-merge
Closed

Fix constant propagator merge operator#1057
peterschrammel wants to merge 3 commits intodiffblue:masterfrom
peterschrammel:fix-constant-propagator-merge

Conversation

@peterschrammel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@peterschrammel peterschrammel commented Jun 24, 2017

The last commit cleans up the linting issues. Recommended to review the commits separately.

Do not merge: more fixes to come.

Previously there were two loops which have been consolidated,
which caused the value not being set to top when two constants
clash. Also, a spurious break statement caused an incomplete
merge leading to erroneous substitutions.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@tautschnig tautschnig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thus far looks good to me; but may I suggest to place "Regression test for constant propagator merge bug" with or after the commit fixing it? That would enable "git bisect" without spurious failures.

@peterschrammel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Closing for now. I'll revisit these fixes once #966 (which heavily modifies the constant propagator) has been merged.

@tautschnig
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Could the regression test provided in this PR be added to #966 asap, please?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants