Skip to content

gh-129539: Include sysexits.h before checking EX_OK #129540

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

gh-129539: Include sysexits.h before checking EX_OK #129540

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

collinfunk
Copy link
Contributor

@collinfunk collinfunk commented Feb 1, 2025 •
edited by bedevere-app bot
Loading

Previously the macro would be redefined when the header was included.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 1, 2025 •
edited by ghost
Loading

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.
CLA signed

@bedevere-app bedevere-app bot mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2025
Closed
@collinfunk collinfunk force-pushed the sysexits-redefinition branch from 0cbd65d to ef40eea Compare February 1, 2025 18:58
ZeroIntensity
ZeroIntensity approved these changes Feb 1, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! LGTM.

cc @vstinner as the person who wrote the code.

vstinner
vstinner reviewed Feb 1, 2025
View reviewed changes
@collinfunk
pythongh-129539: Include sysexits.h before checking EX_OK
4d1df0d 
Previously the macro would be redefined when the header was included.
@collinfunk collinfunk force-pushed the sysexits-redefinition branch from ef40eea to 4d1df0d Compare February 1, 2025 21:39
@collinfunk collinfunk requested a review from vstinner February 1, 2025 21:41
@vstinner
Copy link
Member

vstinner commented Feb 2, 2025

Thanks, your change is correct. But I was fed up of such bugs so I wrote a big refactoring change to reduce the risk of such bug: #129558

Your change remains relevant for 3.13 branch. Can you try to create a new PR for 3.13? Thanks.

@collinfunk collinfunk mentioned this pull request Feb 2, 2025
Merged
@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Feb 2, 2025

GH-129590 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch.

@collinfunk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, your change is correct. But I was fed up of such bugs so I wrote a big refactoring change to reduce the risk of such bug: #129558

Sounds good to me. Thanks!

Your change remains relevant for 3.13 branch. Can you try to create a new PR for 3.13? Thanks.

I created #129590. Not used to the Python pull request workflow so sorry in advance for any mistakes. :)

@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Feb 2, 2025

GH-129590 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch.

@vstinner vstinner closed this Feb 2, 2025
@collinfunk collinfunk deleted the sysexits-redefinition branch February 3, 2025 20:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity approved these changes

@vstinner vstinner Awaiting requested review from vstinner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
awaiting core review
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@collinfunk @vstinner @ZeroIntensity