react

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Joe Savona	82410364e7	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-09 11:10:01 -07:00
Joe Savona	cfdfcec118	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-06 18:04:23 -07:00
Joe Savona	ea7de7aabe	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-06 12:56:54 -07:00
Joe Savona	83859ffed0	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-06 12:41:07 -07:00
Joe Savona	37610dd116	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-06 09:55:39 -07:00
Joe Savona	f30ef6dc09	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-05 22:12:18 -07:00
Joe Savona	9b0bcfeccd	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-05 14:15:58 -07:00
Joe Savona	db6db34fbd	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-05 13:59:25 -07:00
Joe Savona	9eecc9b8af	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-04 16:59:43 -07:00
Joe Savona	bf34a6e8d0	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-04 16:46:56 -07:00
Joe Savona	f1b4bd11f9	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-03 16:59:25 -07:00
Joe Savona	0271b2af5f	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-03 11:32:37 -07:00
Joe Savona	9848383e96	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-03 08:59:57 -07:00
Joe Savona	603357ed64	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-06-01 17:18:45 -07:00
Joe Savona	90d8776244	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-30 16:28:53 -07:00
Joe Savona	624838fab4	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-30 15:56:20 -07:00
Joe Savona	18fa50020c	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-30 11:32:47 -07:00
Joe Savona	d385401145	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-29 17:29:43 -07:00
Joe Savona	f934a0c1e6	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-28 22:26:37 -07:00
Joe Savona	31a62987f1	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-28 17:38:03 -07:00
Joe Savona	e97297f577	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-28 16:28:49 -07:00
Joe Savona	251b7f6fc5	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-28 15:41:58 -07:00
Joe Savona	e15221af8a	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-27 16:30:26 -07:00
Joe Savona	669e504c70	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-27 14:23:03 -07:00
Joe Savona	229ab7bf08	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-23 16:57:46 -07:00
Joe Savona	986c090684	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-22 16:57:04 -07:00
Joe Savona	f469cd3b00	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-12 17:00:35 -07:00
Joe Savona	878c4c9354	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-12 11:56:06 -07:00
Joe Savona	40e29bb4e0	Update base for Update on "[compiler] Repro for false positive ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions" Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function accessing a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away. Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now. [ghstack-poisoned]	2025-05-09 11:21:35 -07:00

Compare commits

29 Commits

asserts-st ... gh/josephs

Diff Content Not Available

Compare commits

29 Commits asserts-st ... gh/josephs

Diff Content Not Available

29 Commits

asserts-st ... gh/josephs