ldionne wrote:
> Anyways, my real objection here was that the underlying issue isn't addressed > - namely that we have no coverage for the integer sanitizer. Since there is a > party willing to fix that now I'm happy with merging this. To clarify, the issue I am fixing with this patch is a broken function precondition when calling log(0), and the patch does add coverage for that. That's why I added the assertion (that should always have been there), because I knew I couldn't rely merely on the sanitizer to catch the issue. If I did not add the precondition check and the corresponding test, and relied on the sanitizer to find the issue, then I'd share your discomfort with landing the patch as-is. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/155932 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
