You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Added a test to lock in and ensure that #5790 original bug report actually panics(which is what we want) so that that issue can be closed. I was debugging the code path in the SSA backend and saw that the condition actually gets evaluated
hence we should lock this in.
To show that this zerodivide.go condition is trippy
That code was last touched in 2010 with 0c54225 in which previously we skipped on nacl ie 21ff75b#diff-d76591abbcb0fcec99a03318b54ecc14R140
but then after 0c54225,
we just removed the && nacl and forgot to update the entire condition, therefore in those tests
we don't check if expected zero divides panics.
Please answer these questions before submitting your issue. Thanks!
What version of Go are you using (
go version
)?go version devel +8887be4 Thu Dec 22 22:43:44 2016 +0000 darwin/amd64
What operating system and processor architecture are you using (
go env
)?GOARCH="amd64"
GOBIN="/Users/emmanuelodeke/go/bin"
GOEXE=""
GOHOSTARCH="amd64"
GOHOSTOS="darwin"
GOOS="darwin"
GOPATH="/Users/emmanuelodeke/go"
GORACE=""
GOROOT="/Users/emmanuelodeke/go/src/go.googlesource.com/go"
GOTOOLDIR="/Users/emmanuelodeke/go/src/go.googlesource.com/go/pkg/tool/darwin_amd64"
GCCGO="gccgo"
CC="clang"
GOGCCFLAGS="-fPIC -m64 -pthread -fno-caret-diagnostics -Qunused-arguments -fmessage-length=0 -fdebug-prefix-map=/var/folders/v3/7z434qpx5v3bw0wh8h2myfpw0000gn/T/go-build810117618=/tmp/go-build -gno-record-gcc-switches -fno-common"
CXX="clang++"
CGO_ENABLED="1"
PKG_CONFIG="pkg-config"
CGO_CFLAGS="-g -O2"
CGO_CPPFLAGS=""
CGO_CXXFLAGS="-g -O2"
CGO_FFLAGS="-g -O2"
CGO_LDFLAGS="-g -O2"
What did you do?
Added a test to lock in and ensure that #5790 original bug report actually panics(which is what we want) so that that issue can be closed. I was debugging the code path in the SSA backend and saw that the condition actually gets evaluated
hence we should lock this in.
To show that this zerodivide.go condition is trippy
What did you expect to see?
What did you see instead?
All the tests that had expected errors were just skipped over
That code was last touched in 2010 with 0c54225 in which previously we skipped on nacl ie 21ff75b#diff-d76591abbcb0fcec99a03318b54ecc14R140
but then after
0c54225,
we just removed the
&& nacl
and forgot to update the entire condition, therefore in those testswe don't check if expected zero divides panics.
/cc @rsc
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: