On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 13:53:04 -0600
Ross Zwisler <zwisler@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > - }
> > + struct traceeval_data keys[] = {
> > + DEFINE_TRACEEVAL_CSTRING( comm ),
> > + DEFINE_TRACEEVAL_NUMBER( RUNNING ),
> > };
> >
> > for (int i = 0; i < OTHER; i++) {
> > - keys[1].number = i;
> > + TRACEEVAL_SET_NUMBER_64(keys[1], i);
>
> I think this should be
> + TRACEEVAL_SET_NUMBER(keys[1], i);
>
> to match the
> + DEFINE_TRACEEVAL_NUMBER( RUNNING ),
>
> a little up in this function.
You're correct, and I already fixed it. Just haven't posted the fix yet.
-- Steve
|