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

Fix for #97 #98

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 5, 2023
Merged

Fix for #97 #98

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 5, 2023

Conversation

BuckarooBanzay
Copy link
Member

@BuckarooBanzay BuckarooBanzay commented Jun 5, 2023

fixes crashes in #97 but multiple selections might still not work

@BuckarooBanzay BuckarooBanzay mentioned this pull request Jun 5, 2023
@BuckarooBanzay BuckarooBanzay requested a review from Athozus June 5, 2023 07:35
@Athozus Athozus added this to the 1.2.0 milestone Jun 5, 2023
@Athozus Athozus added the Bug Something isn't working label Jun 5, 2023
@Athozus Athozus merged commit 42db40b into master Jun 5, 2023
@Athozus
Copy link
Member

Athozus commented Jun 5, 2023

Hop, it is done !
Fix #97

@S-S-X
Copy link
Member

S-S-X commented Jun 5, 2023

I'm 99% sure this should be reverted and switched to correct approach which is using break within each inner loop.

@Athozus
Copy link
Member

Athozus commented Jun 5, 2023

Yep @S-S-X was too fast sorry. I don't really how to revert, let's do it and implement a proper way than I did.

@S-S-X
Copy link
Member

S-S-X commented Jun 5, 2023

Well, don't think there's need for actual git revert but if #entry.<insert-table-name> > 0 then are unnecessary and inner break is necessary.

I could try to explain whys better but I think writing simple test Lua script for nested loop behavior would give better idea, especially watching i and outer loop table length inside inner loop so you can see how it shifts past outer loop table length when last entry is removed while inner loop still has items to check.

@Athozus
Copy link
Member

Athozus commented Jun 5, 2023

At least we can just squash the thing and it's done ? Ok for the code part.

@Athozus Athozus changed the title partial fox for #97 Fix for #97 Jun 5, 2023
@Athozus Athozus deleted the partial-fix-97 branch June 17, 2023 13:53
Athozus added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2023
* partial fox for #97

* Fix #97

---------

Co-authored-by: BuckarooBanzay <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Athozus <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants