On 6 April 2018 at 12:26, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 6 April 2018 at 12:18, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> On 4 April 2018 at 19:51, Adam Jackson wrote:
>>> This, combined with 10/15, means you will now throw BadImplementation
>>>
Hi,
On 6 April 2018 at 12:18, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 4 April 2018 at 19:51, Adam Jackson wrote:
>> This, combined with 10/15, means you will now throw BadImplementation
>> when we used to succeed and simply report no modifiers. I can't think
>> of a
On 4 April 2018 at 19:51, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 16:41 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> From: Emil Velikov
>>
>> Currently depending on the code path hit, the helper will set some of
>> the output values and not others.
>>
>> It could
On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 16:41 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
> From: Emil Velikov
>
> Currently depending on the code path hit, the helper will set some of
> the output values and not others.
>
> It could also leak memory ;-)
>
> At the same time the caller was:
> -
From: Emil Velikov
Currently depending on the code path hit, the helper will set some of
the output values and not others.
It could also leak memory ;-)
At the same time the caller was:
- working around the broken behaviour - by initialising the variables
-