)]}'
{
  "commit": "9c09713871ad6d05e1bd2bd65cb3c78c823cb42e",
  "tree": "46c13b6dbf5059c041a61a9221a96858fa12c733",
  "parents": [
    "faf5c056ca1826cffb5673fa3b445eb61a6bb7eb"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Jørgen Kvalsvik",
    "email": "j@lambda.is",
    "time": "Tue Sep 15 16:04:12 2026 +0200"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "Jørgen Kvalsvik",
    "email": "j@lambda.is",
    "time": "Tue Sep 15 16:16:33 2026 +0200"
  },
  "message": "Compare right field when printing summary\n\nThe check\n\n  if (coverage-\u003ecalls \u0026\u0026 coverage-\u003ecalls \u003d\u003d 0)\n\nwill always be false (as reported by -Wlogical-op) and broken.  I\ndon\u0027t think there is a test suite for function summaries so this was\nnot caught earlier.\n\nThe logic is a bit awkward and could\u0027ve been flipped to avoid checking\ncalls_suppressed twice.  When it was written I wanted to minimize\npatch and preserve the \"natural\" order, since the suppression pragma\nis an opt-in, in a way.\n\n\tPR gcov-profile/127408\n\ngcc/ChangeLog:\n\n\t* gcov.cc (function_summary): Check calls_suppressed, not calls.\n",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "06047a604607771077260a1da269168e71a1b36d",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "gcc/gcov.cc",
      "new_id": "ceed689c1c98e0492731763370e704cac4bcf50a",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "gcc/gcov.cc"
    }
  ]
}