Fixing link directive on dependencies #703
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
brentleyjones
approved these changes
Oct 31, 2019
|
Thank you @rcari! |
|
Can you add a changelog entry as well? |
PR yonaskolb#624 introduced a bug with operator priorities discarding false link settings for dependencies when the target is an executable and the dependency a static library. This PR fixes that.
rcari
force-pushed
the
romualdc/fixLinkDirective
branch
from
d518640 to
b170c8c
Compare
|
Added the |
|
@rcari That is outside of my area and since @yonaskolb had requested changes, I'm going to leave it to him. Sorry 😬. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
PR #624 introduced a bug with operator priorities discarding false link settings
for dependencies when the target is an executable and the dependency a static
library.
Important parentheses were removed in a refactoring, causing the issue as the
??operator has a higher priority than the||operator.