fix MutableLinkedList when appending empty list #915
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
@oxinabox I apologize for tagging you directly: I'm new to contributing, so I'm not sure if that's OK. The changes here are minimal, yet having an infinite iteration every time I try to append an empty list is troublesome. I resort to using my own local version of the package in the meantime. Would you mind reviewing the PR? I'm not sure which of the two options (if any) is better. Thank you. |
|
tagging me is fine. In general I hate the linked list code and want to just delete all of it. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Currently
append!(MutableLinkedList{Int}(1), MutableLinkedList{Int}())results in an infinite iteration. This is due to the order of sentinel-node reassignments and the second list being empty. One way to fix that is by using something likeisempty(l2) && return l1at the top of theappend!method. Another (proposed in this PR) is to just reorder the reassignments. The former is more straightforward, the latter adds no new code.