https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72576
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)gmx.de> ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>Which code analyzer found that?
Sorry, I should have mentioned that.
cppcheck, as in
http://cppcheck.sourceforge.net/
I find it a useful tool.
Agreed. I started applying it to libsynthesis, activesyncd and of course
SyncEvolution as part of the nightly testing. After some less important changes
(performance, unnecessary writes, style), a handful of suppressions and two
real fixes, the code passes. I'll notice regressions, too.
The other real problem was:
Author: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> 2014-01-07 11:04:22
Committer: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> 2014-01-17 15:35:55
Parent: 41f917d912c0a0a066e61ac07bd23492ca58af01 (testing: cppcheck redundant
assignment)
Child: a20a26df4b4ea3870d92982651ff0899bb595034 (cppcheck: suppress warnings)
Branch: for-master/testing
Follows: syncevolution-1-3-99-6
Precedes:
testing: fix naming of log files in doCopy()
The log file guard instance which should have added a "copy" part to log
files
was deleted again before it could have the desired effect. Found by
cppcheck
("Instance of 'SyncPrefix' object is destroyed immediately.").
----------------------------- test/ClientTest.cpp -----------------------------
index ab6a12f..e9d874d 100644
@@ -2977,9 +2977,9 @@ void SyncTests::deleteAll(DeleteAllMode mode) {
}
/** get both clients in sync with empty server, then copy one item from client
A to B */
void SyncTests::doCopy() {
- SyncPrefix("copy", *this);
+ SyncPrefix copy("copy", *this);
// check requirements
CT_ASSERT(accessClientB);
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.