Merged
Conversation
Refs #4764 (comment) also, multiplication via * should be more efficient.
|
👋 Thanks for creating a PR! Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
Thank you for your contribution to Tendermint! 🚀 |
erikgrinaker
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2020
Contributor
erikgrinaker
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This incorrectly overflows for -2⁶³ (MaxInt64 + MinInt64 = -1), but I suppose we can live with that.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5061 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 62.44% 62.55% +0.11%
==========================================
Files 256 256
Lines 26992 26986 -6
==========================================
+ Hits 16854 16880 +26
+ Misses 8644 8627 -17
+ Partials 1494 1479 -15
|
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
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Refs #4764 (comment)
also, multiplication using * should be more efficient.