Closed Strilanc closed 1 year ago
Looks like DetectorNode is initializing fields in the wrong order. I don't think this is a bug, but it's like the first half of a bug.
src/pymatching/sparse_blossom/flooder/detector_node.h:58:13: warning: ‘pm::DetectorNode::observables_crossed_from_source’ will be initialized after [-Wreorder] 58 | obs_int observables_crossed_from_source; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ src/pymatching/sparse_blossom/flooder/detector_node.h:55:19: warning: ‘pm::DetectorNode* pm::DetectorNode::reached_from_source’ [-Wreorder] 55 | DetectorNode* reached_from_source; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ src/pymatching/sparse_blossom/flooder/detector_node.h:36:5: warning: when initialized here [-Wreorder] 36 | DetectorNode() | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ src/pymatching/sparse_blossom/flooder/detector_node.h:60:25: warning: ‘pm::DetectorNode::radius_of_arrival’ will be initialized after [-Wreorder] 60 | cumulative_time_int radius_of_arrival; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ src/pymatching/sparse_blossom/flooder/detector_node.h:47:22: warning: ‘pm::GraphFillRegion* pm::DetectorNode::region_that_arrived’ [-Wreorder] 47 | GraphFillRegion* region_that_arrived; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ src/pymatching/sparse_blossom/flooder/detector_node.h:36:5: warning: when initialized here [-Wreorder] 36 | DetectorNode() | ^~~~~~~~~~~~
Looks like DetectorNode is initializing fields in the wrong order. I don't think this is a bug, but it's like the first half of a bug.