Remove last references to gc_num.since_sweep #49628
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
Commit ebc6776 removed the since_sweep field, but left two references to it, which makes Julia fail to build. This commit removes those references.
|
I'll merge this quickly to get things building again. |
|
Thanks @jakobnissen and @KristofferC! |
|
It would be good to get a post-merge review on this, to make sure that the changes are correct. @topolarity @d-netto Can you review this? |
topolarity
reviewed
May 5, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll be out of office for most of next week and haven't had a chance to peek at this yet, so @d-netto if you're able to take over for the review that'd be a great help
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Commit ebc6776 removed the since_sweep field, but left two references to it, which makes Julia fail to build. This commit removes those references.
Note: I don't know anything about this C code here - I simply replaced both uses with
allocdbecause #49195 claims that the two fields are always equal. Before merging this, it would be nice if anyone who knows the code could give it a thumbs up.Closes #49627