aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0 scripted-diff: Bump copyright of files changed in 2019 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0
promag:
ACK aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0 🎉
fanquake:
ACK aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0 - going to merge this now because the year is over and conflicts are minimal.
Tree-SHA512: 58cb1f53bc4c1395b2766f36fabc7e2332e213780a802762fff0afd59468dad0c3265f553714d761c7a2c44ff90f7dc250f04458f4b2eb8eef8b94f8c9891321
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Current implementation relies either on asserts or sometimes checks then
returning a special value; In the case of asserts (or no assert where we
use the value without checks) it'd be better to make it explicit to
function caller that the ptr must be not_null; otherwise gsl::not_null
will call terminate.
See
https://github.com/microsoft/GSL/blob/main/docs/headers.md#user-content-H-pointers-not_null
and
https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines#Rf-nullptr
I'm interested in a conceptual review; specifically on if this is
beneficial over just converting these ptrs to be a reference?
## What was done?
*Partial* implementation on using gsl::not_null in dash code
## How Has This Been Tested?
Building
## Breaking Changes
None
## Checklist:
_Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes that
apply._
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* Squashed 'src/dashbls/' content from commit 66ee820fbc
git-subtree-dir: src/dashbls
git-subtree-split: 66ee820fbc9e3b97370db8c164904af48327a124
* build: stop tracking build-system generated relic_conf.h.in
* build: add support for building bls-signatures from local subtree
* build: add exclusions to linting scripts and filters
* build: drop bls-signatures (bls-dash) from depends
* Update to leveldb upstream using subtree merge
* Import crc32c using subtree merge as as 'src/crc32c'
* build: Update build system for new leveldb
Upstream leveldb switched build systems, which means we need to define
a few different values.
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* doc: Add crc32c subtree to developer notes
* test: Add crc32c to subtree check linter
* test: Add crc32c exception to various linters and generation scripts
* build: Add LCOV exception for crc32c
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* build: CRC32C build system integration
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Change ctpl implementation to use STL queue & mutex.
Use ctpl synchronized queue instead of boost lockfree queue in bls worker aggregator.
Use smart pointers for memory management of Aggregator and VectorAggregator. With 'delete this;' the objects are prone to data race on the delete operator.
Use smart pointers for memory management of ContributionVerifier.
Pass shared_ptr by value to other threads via worker pool.
000000035b20402dea3e8168165cd4eefdc97539 Obsolete #!/bin/bash shebang (DesWurstes)
Pull request description:
> `#!/bin/bash` assumes it is always installed to `/bin/` which can cause issues
> `#!/usr/bin/env bash` searches the user's `PATH` to find the `bash` binary
Details: https://github.com/dylanaraps/pure-bash-bible#obsolete-syntax
I'm open to comments: Should I also fix `#!/bin/sh`?
Tree-SHA512: b47bb4828116aa119f1899c68fee081270d51a898535490b9c616bf0f3660ad953f29c361eafc759bc64cdd54ee6eeecb2d79e9fdb5291a996a515c719805476
fa3c910bfeab00703c947c5200a64c21225b50ef test: Move linters to test/lint, add readme (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This moves the checks and linters from `devtools` to a subfolder in `test`. (Motivated by my opinion that the dev tools are mostly for generating code and updating the repo whereas the linters are read-only checks.)
Also, adds a readme to clarify that checks and linters are only meant to prevent bugs and user facing issues, not merely stylistic preference or inconsistencies. (This is motivated by the diversity in developers and work flows as well as existing code styles. It would be too disruptive to change all existing code to a single style or too burdensome to force all developers to adhere to a single style. Also note that our style guide is changing, so locking in at the wrong style "too early" would only waste resources.)
Tree-SHA512: 9b10e89f2aeaf0c8a9ae248aa891d74e0abf0569f8e5dfd266446efa8bfaf19f0ea0980abf0b0b22f0d8416ee90d7435d21a9f9285b66df43f370b7979173406
