At 2020-10-14T15:45:16+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi, > > this is the second portability issue that killed the build for me. > Again, i'm looking for an OK to push the fix. > > Since i have little experience with C++, please check that the fix is > correct and matches your intent.
TL;DR: LGTM, +1.
As far as I understand C++[1], yes it does. I have an allergy to
allowing even the potential of a read from uninitialized storage, but I
recognize that this was not part of the ethic of early C++, where
everything was about "zero-cost" abstraction a.k.a. G01NG F4573RRRRRR.
> I don't think a Changelog entry is needed here, either. This
> mini-issue never made it into a release and no user-visible change is
> intended.
Okay. Per the rough consensus hammered out 3 years ago or so, my
personal practice is to add a ChangeLog entry if:
1. I'm changing executable code;
2. I'm fixing a ticket;
3. I'm making a "big" change to documentation.
That way the ChangeLog doesn't get clogged with my numerous editorial
revisions to documentation[2].
So my ChangeLogging threshold is lower than yours for executable code,
but I don't mind that. I'm still the new kid around here and I
appreciate the increased probability of code reviews.
Regards,
Branden
[1] And one's understanding must be rebuilt ex nihilo with every new
release of the standard because FEATURES FEATURES FEATURES.
[2] Of course _everything_ gets a commit message, and even for changes
where I produce a ChangeLog entry, I often have supplementary
information in the commit message.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
