-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 486
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
fix: clean up code to eliminate compilation warnings #524
Conversation
Howard229
commented
Aug 20, 2024
•
edited
Loading
edited
- Assign an initial value of 0 to the 'nSockets_base' variable to prevent the compilation warning 'may be used uninitialized in this function'.
- Delete the 'blockNum' variable, which is defined but not used in the 'polar_bulk_read_buffer_common' function.
- Delete the unused function definition 'px_show_scan_unit_size' from the 'guc_px.c' file. The implementation of this function has been removed in the d52e825 commit.
Hi @Howard229 ~ Thanks for your contribution in this PR. ❤️ Please make sure that your PR conforms the standard, and has passed all the checks. We will review your PR as soon as possible. |
Hey @Howard229 : Something wrong occuried during the checks of your commit 😟, please check the detail:
|
01023ef
to
76dd655
Compare
Hey @Howard229 : Congratulations~ 🎉 Your commit has passed all the checks. Please wait for further manual review. |
1、为nSockets_base变量赋初始值0,防止编译告警‘may be used uninitialized in this function’; |
Hey @mrdrivingduck , could you help me review&merge it |
@Howard229 better to edit your commit title and commit message to explain what you have changed. The code itself LGTM. |
Okay, I'll make some modifications |
1. Assign an initial value of 0 to the 'nSockets_base' variable to prevent the compilation warning 'may be used uninitialized in this function'. 2. Delete the 'blockNum' variable, which is defined but not used in the 'polar_bulk_read_buffer_common' function. 3. Delete the unused function definition 'px_show_scan_unit_size' from the 'guc_px.c' file. The implementation of this function has been removed in the d52e825 commit.
76dd655
to
fab2fe4
Compare
Hey @Howard229 : Congratulations~ 🎉 Your commit has passed all the checks. Please wait for further manual review. |
Hey @mrdrivingduck , I have updated the commit title and commit message. Could you please review them again? |
/rebase-and-merge |
@mrdrivingduck PR has been merged. 🍗 Thanks again for the contributors involved in this thread: ❤️ |