[vim/vim] Also free qf_last_bufname in ll_new_list (#1729)
Daniel Hahler
Followup to #1728.
Without this, the Neomake test suite would still fail.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/1729
Commit Summary
- Also free qf_last_bufname in ll_new_list
File Changes
- M src/quickfix.c (4)
Patch Links:
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
Daniel Hahler
Build failure seems unrelated?!
Christian Brabandt
restarted filed travis job, did run successfully this time
Codecov
Codecov Report
Merging #1729 into master will increase coverage by
6.75%.
The diff coverage is100%.
@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #1729 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 68.21% 74.96% +6.75% ========================================== Files 76 76 Lines 124299 124911 +612 ========================================== + Hits 84788 93639 +8851 + Misses 39511 31272 -8239
| Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| src/quickfix.c | 91.68% <100%> (+9.16%) |
⬆️ |
| src/if_lua.c | 50.88% <0%> (+0.65%) |
⬆️ |
| src/gui_beval.c | 39.93% <0%> (+0.92%) |
⬆️ |
| src/if_python3.c | 77.37% <0%> (+1.32%) |
⬆️ |
| src/if_py_both.h | 75.56% <0%> (+1.43%) |
⬆️ |
| src/if_perl.xs | 86.41% <0%> (+1.44%) |
⬆️ |
| src/if_python.c | 78.9% <0%> (+1.95%) |
⬆️ |
| src/main.c | 55.13% <0%> (+2.18%) |
⬆️ |
| src/gui_gtk.c | 24.81% <0%> (+2.3%) |
⬆️ |
| src/netbeans.c | 27.1% <0%> (+2.53%) |
⬆️ |
| ... and 63 more |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact),ø = not affected,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6e62da3...dc12322. Read the comment docs.
Bram Moolenaar
Christian Brabandt wrote:
> restarted filed travis job, did run successfully this time
always worked without it before.
--
If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the
human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its
full potential, that word would be "meetings."
/// Bram Moolenaar -- Br...@Moolenaar.net -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
Daniel Hahler
@brammool
#1728 fixed the simple test case I factored out of Neomake's test suite, but it was not enough to really fix it.
This PR fixes it, but I have not factored out a test for it, since it seemed to also be not required for merging the last fix in this regard.
It might still miss some creation of new location/quickfix lists, but at least it now does not need manual cache busting in the Neomake test suite anymore.
Daniel Hahler
@brammool
The test failure looked like some flaky test.
Christian Brabandt
@brammool I just restarted the test, since the failure seemed unrelated as suggested by Daniel. Since the test all run successful, that means the patch at least did not break anything obvious. That doesn't mean, the fix isn't needed.
I think what happened was, a flaky test failed, it was restarted and then the "server did not respond" (or something similar). It looks like the logfile is not available anymore and I don't remember exactly the error message.
Daniel Hahler
Yes, logs are gone after you restart the job.