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
Assgn badflag propagation #2
Conversation
…c selection of algorithm (classic polyfill vs. pnpolyfill_pp)
…image2D_pnpoly
Conflicts: Basic/Ops/ops.pd
Sorry I've been sleeping on this for a while. Should I flag this for discussion on the PDL Porters list? |
I don't think it was ever merged. Running it through the Porters list is a Thanks! On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 10:15 AM, run4flat notifications@github.com wrote:
|
Is this PR still valid? |
Not as it stands - look at all those "merge" instead of rebasing! |
Obsoleted by the passage of time, and #51. |
Terribly sorry. I had completely forgotten about this. Thanks for chasing it down! |
Nothing to apologise for! Are you comfortable these days with rebasing? Are there other contributions you'd like to make to PDL? |
Add propagation of badflag with .= (Ops::assgn) for sf.net bug 3543056.
I tried to make the documentation as explicit as I could that badflags are not automatically propagated to the parent of a subpiddle, and pointed to the relevant sections of PDL::Bad docs.
Many thanks.
Tim