Barret Rhoden <brho@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Michael - > > On 6/1/19 5:09 PM, michael@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >> From: Michael Platings <michael@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Thanks to Derrick Stolee for highlighting missing coverage. >> >> In the case of "certainties[i] = CERTAINTY_NOT_CALCULATED" this was >> defeating an optimization that preserved results of calculations >> between line-matching passes. This had caused other code to never >> be executed - that code is now executed and only discards calculation >> results that are no longer valid. >> >> In the case of "max_search_distance_b = 0" this was never executed >> because another statement was added earlier in the function to return >> early in such a case. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Platings <michael@xxxxxxxxx> > > If it's OK with you, I can squash this into your existing patch in the > blame-ignore patch set. Thanks, both. That'd make my life easier ;-) by allowing me to ignore this patch for now, knowing you two are on top of the issue.
