[lldb-dev] Referencing rdar bugs in commit messages
egranata at apple.com
Thu Nov 13 10:42:09 PST 2014
> On Nov 13, 2014, at 10:32 AM, jingham at apple.com wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Sean Callanan <scallanan at apple.com <mailto:scallanan at apple.com>> wrote:
>> Zachary might be referring to commits like 221850.
>> "Do not override the existing definition of addr_size when adding new properties to SBTarget. Fixes rdar://18963842 <rdar://18963842>”
> I see nothing wrong with the content of that comment. It's clear that it means "addr_size" was changed to mean something it shouldn't mean. The details in the Radar are "addr_size no longer returns the correct value." which was obvious from the fact that it's definition was changed and didn't add any more detail. So saying more about it wouldn't have helped.
+1 - the patch seemed trivial and obvious enough that a few words suffice to explain it, regardless of radar
> I wouldn't put "Fixes rdar//whatever" in the comment, that does seem like it's dangling candy just out of reach.
I like having the radar number somewhere in there, but as you say...
> I always just put the radar number at the bottom of the comment since it is useful when you get another Radar reporting the same problem and internally we want to dup the two, but it makes it clear it isn't a vital piece of info.
If that is a better modus operandi by community consensus, sure works for me
> But other than that the comment should stand on its own.
>> It’s not immediately clear from that message what the original issue here was: a problem with 220372 where addr_size was erroneously repurposed to mean “size of a target byte in host bytes” where it had a different meaning (“size of a target address in bytes”) originally.
>>> On Nov 13, 2014, at 10:11 AM, Greg Clayton <gclayton at apple.com> wrote:
>>> We strip the actual title from the radar, but we do describe what is being fixed in each commit message. So you aren't missing any info.
>>>> On Nov 12, 2014, at 5:47 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>>>> Would it be possible, when referencing a rdar bug in a commit message, to additionally provide a brief description of the bug that it fixes? Those of us without access to rdar don't have any insight into what the patches are fixing.
>>>> I understand this may not be possible when the bugs are related to issues that are not public information, but wherever possible I think this would benefit all of the non Apple people.
>>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>>> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> lldb-dev mailing list
>> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu>
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev>
📩 egranata@.com ☎️ 27683
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lldb-dev