Skip to content

[5.0] Remote: use the qualified name for NodePointer #22176

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 29, 2019

Conversation

compnerd
Copy link
Member

Use the qualified name for the NodePointer. The unqualified name
causes ambiguity when building on Windows. This repairs the Windows
build.

Replace this paragraph with a description of your changes and rationale. Provide links to external references/discussions if appropriate.

Resolves SR-NNNN.

Use the qualified name for the `NodePointer`.  The unqualified name
causes ambiguity when building on Windows.  This repairs the Windows
build.
@compnerd compnerd requested a review from a team as a code owner January 28, 2019 19:15
@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

Cherry-pick of #22155 to repair the build for Windows. This is a very low risk fix, fixing a compile time issue for building the host tools for Windows.

@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

@swift-ci please test

@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

CC: @tkremenek @bob-wilson (as proxy for @apple/swift5-branch-managers)

@compnerd compnerd changed the title Remote: use the qualified name for NodePointer [5.0] Remote: use the qualified name for NodePointer Jan 28, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@bob-wilson bob-wilson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@bob-wilson bob-wilson merged commit a800b96 into swiftlang:swift-5.0-branch Jan 29, 2019
@compnerd compnerd deleted the remote branch February 10, 2019 19:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants