fix IntSet tests invalid since #23138 #23559
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
Now IntSet have the length of their underlying BitVector be a multiple of 64, so resizing them to something else breaks this invariant.
rfourquet
added
bugfix
|
Ah, nice. I had missed #23138. I think my reasoning here was just as a contrived test for cases with different length storage. Since I ported a completely manually managed storage to BitArray storage, I didn't even see these opportunities to simplify this further. |
mbauman
approved these changes
Sep 2, 2017
|
Ok thanks! (I got confused with the PR numbers when refering to yours, I updated the OP accordingly) |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Since #23138 IntSet have the length of their underlying BitVector be
a multiple of 64, so resizing them to something else breaks
this invariant.
cc @mbauman : you made these tests in #20456, what was the intent of this manual resizing?