[auto-pr] #156: [Coding Guideline]: Subset Guideline for CERT C, INT34-C: Do not shift an expression by a negative number of bits or by greater than or equal to the number of bits that exist in the operand#180
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for scrc-coding-guidelines ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
|
@felix91gr -- could you add the new tags you're using in another PR? Note that this fails: |
|
@PLeVasseur ohh! I see. The Form for creating a New Guideline Issue didn't mention that new tags needed to be added before using them. That's a bit of Contributor Experience we could improve in the Form
I'll be adding the new tags right away :) |
92b2434 to
00fb52c
Compare
00fb52c to
f5efaf5
Compare
|
GEH. The FLS spec file got us again! Hahahah. Okay, brb, will open a PR to update it. |
f5efaf5 to
015fd0d
Compare
|
@x0rw I'll need your help again QwQ It seems like the table in the original issue (same for #181's original issue) isn't being picked up quite how sphinx would want it. Do you know what I should do? The table looks like this: | **Compilation Mode** | **`0 <= M < N`** | **`M < 0`** | **`N <= M`** |
|:--------------------:|:----------------:|:---------------------:|:-------------------:|
| Debug | Shifts normally | Panics | Panics |
| Release | Shifts normally | Shifts by `M mod N` | Shifts by `M mod N` | |
015fd0d to
767d325
Compare
|
I've fixed the table manually. There's a typo that CI complains about; #206 fixes it |
bc2f62c to
9d35d71
Compare
PLeVasseur
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good to see this working with the manual table.
Content-wise this is good.
There's a couple of formatting snags I pointed out.
|
Opened #212 to track to resolution so that we can get this build to pass. |
|
@felix91gr -- please rebase and push. Build should work now |
724f698 to
d5ef141
Compare
|
(I just posted this same message in #181) @PLeVasseur I just did the rebase and push. For some reason, Netlify is still trying to build the document with Python 3.14 🤔 |
Co-authored-by: felix91gr <felix91gr@users.noreply.github.com> Note: tables were written by hand due to limitations in our automation
Note: this must be addressed at the automation level, since said code blocks were generated from a GH issue
d5ef141 to
8518de4
Compare
|
I've rebased these changes (even though they shouldn't need to be in this case) so that Netlify can stop building it with Python 3.14. I think all should be well |
Note: this must be addressed at the automation level, since said hyperlinks were generated from a GH issue
Note: this must be addressed at the automation level, since said hyperlinks were generated from a GH issue
c223157 to
82fe0d5
Compare
|
@PLeVasseur I've made it work (also found another bug in the markdown->rst conversion; I've just filed it in #221). I believe this PR is all good now. There's the last review you made, which if I recall correctly was about extra indentation being present? It has been addressed for a while now, unless it was about something else. I really wish git was able to retain the ID and date of a commit even if it was rebased on top of other, yet independent, commits. It would let me check if I made the second commit in this PR in response to that review or not. Anywho, let's merge this one? I still have to rebase #181, but I've left it alone for now. Since this one and #181 touch the same file, I'm sure I'd better rebase #181 after the commits in this one are part of |
|
I'll take a look! Thanks 🥰 |
PLeVasseur
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apologies on not having reviewed this after it was updated. LGTM.

This PR was automatically generated from issue #156.
Authored by: @felix91gr
Closes #156.