fix~: Memory.get_segment_byte_offset on Passive data sections
#268
+13
−5
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
|
Looks like the tests aren't happy. |
spotandjake
force-pushed
the
spotandjake-passive-memory-offset
branch
from
95d484d to
51801e8
Compare
spotandjake
changed the title
Memory.get_segment_byte_offset on Passive data sectionsMemory.get_segment_byte_offset on Passive data sections
Member
Author
I fixed them, I thought |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I noticed that
Memory.get_segment_byte_offsetwould segfault when you pass in a passive section. I decided to fix this by making it return an option properly, to match up with thenullishbehaviour of the js api.Breaking: This is breaking as we now return an option.