[MINOR][VL] Use resize() instead of reserve() in getEmitInfo#11623
Merged
rui-mo merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom Feb 18, 2026
Merged
[MINOR][VL] Use resize() instead of reserve() in getEmitInfo#11623rui-mo merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
rui-mo merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@rui-mo can you please review this minor change? Thanks in advance! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes are proposed in this pull request?
This PR replaces
reserve()withresize()forprojectNamesandexpressionsvectors ingetEmitInfo().std::vector::reserve()allocates capacity but does not changesize(). The subsequent loop assigns elements viaoperator[]which accesses indices beyondsize()and this is undefined behaviour.How was this patch tested?
Existing tests.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No