Hello golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com, I'd like you to review this change to https://code.google.com/p/go.tools
https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043/diff/40001/cmd/stringer/stringer.go File cmd/stringer/stringer.go (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043/diff/40001/cmd/stringer/stringer.go#... cmd/stringer/stringer.go:458: return 64 return 32 64 is extremely unlikely I think but leaving for r
LGTM after change to 32. https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043/diff/40001/cmd/stringer/stringer.go File cmd/stringer/stringer.go (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043/diff/40001/cmd/stringer/stringer.go#... cmd/stringer/stringer.go:458: return 64 On 2014/09/04 03:43:04, gri wrote: > return 32 > > 64 is extremely unlikely I think but leaving for r I agree. 32 is fine. more than 2 billion constants? the compiler won't even compile it, i'm sure.
Hello golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com, gri@golang.org, r@golang.org (cc: golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com), Please take another look.
https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043/diff/40001/cmd/stringer/stringer.go File cmd/stringer/stringer.go (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043/diff/40001/cmd/stringer/stringer.go#... cmd/stringer/stringer.go:458: return 64 On 2014/09/04 04:55:08, r wrote: > On 2014/09/04 03:43:04, gri wrote: > > return 32 > > > > 64 is extremely unlikely I think but leaving for r > > I agree. 32 is fine. more than 2 billion constants? the compiler won't even > compile it, i'm sure. > Done.
LGTM
*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=4c2a8e992d65&repo=tools *** go.tools/cmd/stringer: Fix build on 32bit OSs. LGTM=r R=golang-codereviews, gri, r CC=golang-codereviews https://codereview.appspot.com/138040043 Committer: Rob Pike <r@golang.org>