[iOS] DDQueryOffset is the wrong size in Public SDK builds
Created attachment 306262 [details] Patch
Attachment 306262 [details] did not pass style-queue: ERROR: Source/WebCore/platform/spi/cocoa/DataDetectorsCoreSPI.h:109: Please declare enum bitfields as unsigned integral types. [runtime/enum_bitfields] [5] ERROR: Source/WebCore/platform/spi/cocoa/DataDetectorsCoreSPI.h:110: Please declare enum bitfields as unsigned integral types. [runtime/enum_bitfields] [5] Total errors found: 2 in 4 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
I think this might be the cause of bug 167594!
Comment on attachment 306262 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=306262&action=review Neat. > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:4 > + https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=170496 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=161967 ? > Source/WebCore/platform/spi/cocoa/DataDetectorsCoreSPI.h:120 > +static_assert(sizeof(DDQueryOffset) == 8, "DDQueryOffset is defined to be 8 bytes in the Public SDK build."); The message doesn't sound quite right - the assert can potentially fail in non-public build too (and that's a good thing).
(In reply to Alexey Proskuryakov from comment #4) > Comment on attachment 306262 [details] > Patch > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=306262&action=review > > Neat. > > > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:4 > > + https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=170496 > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=161967 ? > > > Source/WebCore/platform/spi/cocoa/DataDetectorsCoreSPI.h:120 > > +static_assert(sizeof(DDQueryOffset) == 8, "DDQueryOffset is defined to be 8 bytes in the Public SDK build."); > > The message doesn't sound quite right - the assert can potentially fail in > non-public build too (and that's a good thing). The message isn't saying in which build the assertion is failing, it's saying what size our SPI header defines the struct to be in the Public SDK build; it's just restating the assertion in English. I'll reword it as an error. Thanks for the review!
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 167594 ***
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 161967 ***