★ wanayoo — archive 1999 https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/16950Nouvelle recherche | Portail wanayoo
Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

src: remove superfluous check in backtrace_posix.cc #16950

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

addaleax
Copy link
Member

@addaleax addaleax commented Nov 11, 2017

The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored as part of the loop condition.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

src

The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored
as part of the loop condition.
targos
targos approved these changes Nov 11, 2017
refack
refack approved these changes Nov 11, 2017
@addaleax
Copy link
Member Author

@addaleax addaleax commented Nov 14, 2017

@addaleax
Copy link
Member Author

@addaleax addaleax commented Nov 18, 2017

Landed in 8854598

@addaleax addaleax closed this Nov 18, 2017
@addaleax addaleax deleted the backtrace-superfluous-line branch Nov 18, 2017
addaleax added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2017
The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored
as part of the loop condition.

PR-URL: #16950
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
MylesBorins added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 12, 2017
The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored
as part of the loop condition.

PR-URL: #16950
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2017
@MylesBorins
Copy link
Member

@MylesBorins MylesBorins commented Dec 19, 2017

@addaleax should this be backported to v6.x or v8.x?

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Member

@MylesBorins MylesBorins commented Jan 19, 2018

ping @addaleax

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Member

@MylesBorins MylesBorins commented Feb 27, 2018

ping @addaleax

MylesBorins added a commit that referenced this issue May 22, 2018
The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored
as part of the loop condition.

PR-URL: #16950
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
MylesBorins added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2018
The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored
as part of the loop condition.

PR-URL: #16950
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Jul 9, 2018
rvagg added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 16, 2018
The error check doesn't matter because a failure would be ignored
as part of the loop condition.

PR-URL: #16950
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants