Codecov Report

Attention: 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (9e2b48d) 68.70% compared to head (86e97e7) 68.68%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #422      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.70%   68.68%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         119      119              
  Lines       11642    11647       +5     
  Branches     1920     1920              
==========================================
+ Hits         7999     8000       +1     
- Misses       2670     2674       +4     
  Partials      973      973              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

I'm wondering if this change makes total sense - we're taking in a function type which is explicitly unsized, and stating that it's a sized type StubbedPointer. I wonder if it would make more sense to immediately return an Incomplete from this switch case, along with a depth decrement. That would work if the goal is to prevent hitting the catch statement. I could be missing something though!

I wrote this bit of code which I think neatens up the depth decrement, if we do decrement in this specific switch case it would make sense to use something like this: https://github.com/JakeHillion/object-introspection/blob/6be7e7708bfd69c75faa46d42df81a79734eab46/oi/type_graph/ClangTypeParser.cpp#L45-L55

Finding a test case for this proved difficult. Putting this on hold until we hit this issue in production again.

Hi @tyroguru!

Thank you for your pull request.

We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and yours needs attention.

You currently have a record in our system, but the CLA is no longer valid, and will need to be resubmitted.

Process

In order for us to review and merge your suggested changes, please sign at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need to sign the corporate CLA.

Once the CLA is signed, our tooling will perform checks and validations. Afterwards, the pull request will be tagged with CLA signed. The tagging process may take up to 1 hour after signing. Please give it that time before contacting us about it.

If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]. Thanks!