Skip to content
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

Normative bug fix: Fix RevalidateAtomicAccess to check against byte length #3200

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 19, 2023

Conversation

syg
Copy link
Contributor

@syg syg commented Oct 16, 2023

Fixes #3199.

Marking this as editorial because the current spec text always fails and is obviously a bug.

@syg syg added the spec bug label Oct 16, 2023
@syg syg requested a review from a team October 16, 2023 18:58
@syg syg added the editor call to be discussed in the next editor call label Oct 18, 2023
@syg syg changed the title Editorial: Fix RevalidateAtomicAccess to check against byte length Normative bug fix: Fix RevalidateAtomicAccess to check against byte length Oct 18, 2023
@michaelficarra michaelficarra removed the editor call to be discussed in the next editor call label Oct 18, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@bakkot bakkot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM but possibly the description could be updated to make this clearer: for example,

This operation revalidates the index within the backing buffer for atomic operations

Otherwise it's natural to assume that the index is an index into the TA.

It might be nice to additionally rename the various "indexedPosition" aliases (in this as well as all other algorithms) to "indexInBuffer" or something - it's pretty weird to have an algorithm with both an "index" and an "indexedPosition" alias, where the first refers to an index within a TA and the second to an index within an ArrayBuffer.

@syg syg added the ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land. label Oct 18, 2023
…c39#3200)

Fixes tc39#3199.

Marking this as editorial because the current spec text always fails and is obviously a bug.
@ljharb ljharb merged commit 4b93d8e into tc39:main Oct 19, 2023
7 checks passed
zhangenming pushed a commit to zhangenming/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Dec 22, 2023
…c39#3200)

Fixes tc39#3199.

Marking this as editorial because the current spec text always fails and is obviously a bug.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land. spec bug
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RevalidateAtomicAccess will incorrectly fail on valid indices
4 participants