- User Since
- Feb 14 2017, 7:36 AM (131 w, 3 d)
Fri, Aug 16
Wed, Aug 14
Guys, thanks a lot for the feedback! Some answers below, I'll get back to the code soon.
Tue, Aug 13
Friendly ping :) Feedback on the description would be the most important at this point, as I feel like I can improve the code a bit more. But if you could check out the code, that would be also great. Note there are at least two TODOs that I'll address before merging. It's still a draft, even though it works.
Mon, Aug 12
Update the test a bit more
Actually updated the test to prove everyone (including myself) that this works.
fix a typo
Fri, Aug 9
Use LOADED instead of INITED, plus fix alignment of keywords in the log
Thu, Aug 8
FTR, changed the extension back to .h in r368331.
@morehouse the CL got a little messy because of the renaming, but I'd appreciate if you could take a look at the new version of ConsumeFloatingPointInRange, it's ~20 lines. Thanks!
Re-written ConsumeFloatingPointInRange in another fashion. Will describe the new logic in the description.
Re-write ConsumeFloatingPointInRange, change extension back to .h
Wed, Aug 7
@morehouse Ready for review, PTAL once you get a chance :)
Add parens to the condition for better readability
Tue, Aug 6
Objection: .hpp is not idiomatic in LLVM.
Self-approval for a minor change.
Mon, Aug 5
Rebase + re-run the tests locally
Fri, Aug 2
Keep the header at the old location as well for smooth migration.
But seriously, GCC users can just grab this header and use it -- that's the current state of the world, so this CL doesn't make life for GCC users harder.
If this change gets accepted, any clang user should be able to use it via #include <fuzzer/FuzzedDataProvider.h>, rather than have it somewhere in their repo. It is not tied to -fsanitizer=fuzzer or any other compiler flags.
the terminology here means those are 2 separate inputs, right?
I'm not opposing, but i have a question - this is not fuzzer specific at all, right?
Jul 23 2019
TBR as it seems to be a trivial fix. Tests do not break locally. Will revert if anything goes wrong :)
Jul 9 2019
Jun 28 2019
Getting ready to commit.
Jun 27 2019
No problem, I'll commit it tomorrow on your behalf.
Apologies for the delayed review. LGTM and thanks for the fix!
Jun 20 2019
LGTM, thanks @sajjadm !
+1, the change looks good, but if you could modify the existing test for lcov export in a way so that it starts failing with the existing implementation but will pass after your chance, that'd be awesome.
Jun 19 2019
Self-approval for a minor fix.
Jun 18 2019
Trying rebase, re-running the tests, and committing again.
Hm, I'm doing the following:
Thanks a lot, Matt!
Jun 17 2019
Jun 14 2019
Added a test, thanks @metzman for the idea how to test it.
The change is tested and ready for review. Please take a look :)
Add static_assert guards to ConvertUnsignedToSigned.