Rietveld Code Review Tool
Help | Bug tracker | Discussion group | Source code | Sign in
(355)

Issue 10041044: code review 10041044: cmd/6c: use full 64-bit address in block copy (Closed)

Can't Edit
Can't Publish+Mail
Start Review
Created:
12 years, 1 month ago by rsc
Modified:
12 years, 1 month ago
Reviewers:
ality
CC:
ken2, golang-dev
Visibility:
Public.

Description

cmd/6c: use full 64-bit address in block copy Already fixed independently in Plan 9.

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : diff -r bfdbd835628c https://code.google.com/p/go/ #

Patch Set 3 : diff -r 3d953445e2fb https://code.google.com/p/go/ #

Total comments: 2
Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+5 lines, -5 lines) Patch
M src/cmd/6c/cgen.c View 1 5 chunks +5 lines, -5 lines 2 comments Download

Messages

Total messages: 5
rsc
Hello ken2 (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com), I'd like you to review this change to https://code.google.com/p/go/
12 years, 1 month ago (2013-06-05 14:39:05 UTC) #1
rsc
*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=ca145611fa96 *** cmd/6c: use full 64-bit address in block copy Already fixed ...
12 years, 1 month ago (2013-06-05 14:39:09 UTC) #2
ality
https://codereview.appspot.com/10041044/diff/5001/src/cmd/6c/cgen.c File src/cmd/6c/cgen.c (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/10041044/diff/5001/src/cmd/6c/cgen.c#newcode1682 src/cmd/6c/cgen.c:1682: nn->type = types[TIND]; This one was not changed in ...
12 years, 1 month ago (2013-06-05 23:14:14 UTC) #3
rsc
https://codereview.appspot.com/10041044/diff/5001/src/cmd/6c/cgen.c File src/cmd/6c/cgen.c (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/10041044/diff/5001/src/cmd/6c/cgen.c#newcode1682 src/cmd/6c/cgen.c:1682: nn->type = types[TIND]; On 2013/06/05 23:14:15, ality wrote: > ...
12 years, 1 month ago (2013-06-10 17:32:26 UTC) #4
ality
12 years, 1 month ago (2013-06-12 14:34:18 UTC) #5
rsc@golang.org once said:
> src/cmd/6c/cgen.c:1682: nn->type = types[TIND];
> On 2013/06/05 23:14:15, ality wrote:
> >This one was not changed in Plan 9's 6c. Should it have been?
> 
> I think so. Can you report it?

Will do. Thanks for the response.

  Anthony
Sign in to reply to this message.

Powered by Google App Engine
RSS Feeds Recent Issues | This issue
This is Rietveld f62528b