src: rename CHECK_NOT_OOB() macro #8784
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
bnoordhuis
added
buffer
danbev
approved these changes
Sep 26, 2016
|
LGTM |
1 similar comment
|
LGTM |
cjihrig
approved these changes
Sep 26, 2016
Rename CHECK_NOT_OOB() to THROW_AND_RETURN_IF_OOB() because the old name suggests it asserts and aborts when it is really a control flow macro. PR-URL: nodejs#8784 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
bnoordhuis
force-pushed
the
rename-CHECK_NOT_OOB
branch
from
4f7c1b4
to
c991d64
Compare
|
Those tick processor scripts again... @chainoy I'm afraid I didn't have your name and email so I couldn't add a Reviewed-By tag for you. |
jasnell
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 29, 2016
Rename CHECK_NOT_OOB() to THROW_AND_RETURN_IF_OOB() because the old name suggests it asserts and aborts when it is really a control flow macro. PR-URL: #8784 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
|
@bnoordhuis is this a useful backport? |
|
I'm obviously not @bnoordhuis but I doubt it would hurt much to backport if it applies cleanly. If it doesn't, it's likely ok not to land it. |
|
What @jasnell said. It if applies cleanly, it's beneficial to back-port. |
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 11, 2016
Rename CHECK_NOT_OOB() to THROW_AND_RETURN_IF_OOB() because the old name suggests it asserts and aborts when it is really a control flow macro. PR-URL: #8784 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
|
@bnoordhuis this is not applying cleanly. Please feel free to switch the label to |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Rename CHECK_NOT_OOB() to THROW_AND_RETURN_IF_OOB() because the old name
suggests it asserts and aborts when it is really a control flow macro.