Skip to content

Conversation

@pfultz2
Copy link
Contributor

@pfultz2 pfultz2 commented Mar 23, 2025

No description provided.

@chrchr-github
Copy link
Collaborator

Should we really restore the simplification? It seems like this only masks issues in other areas.

@pfultz2
Copy link
Contributor Author

pfultz2 commented Mar 27, 2025

There seems to be a lot of work to make this work in valueflow and it still doesn't completely work since the variable is not set and it uses the wrong exprid.

What issues does this mask? Perhaps its simpler to fix those issues instead. Maybe a flag could be added to the Token.

@chrchr-github
Copy link
Collaborator

What issues does this mask? Perhaps its simpler to fix those issues instead. Maybe a flag could be added to the Token.

I was thinking of the comments in https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/13665. We would also reintroduce a FN uninitvar.

@pfultz2
Copy link
Contributor Author

pfultz2 commented Mar 27, 2025

I was thinking of the comments in https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/13665.

What specifically are you referring to?

We would also reintroduce a FN uninitvar.

Let me look at the FN to see what the issue is.

@pfultz2
Copy link
Contributor Author

pfultz2 commented Apr 12, 2025

@chrchr-github Fixed the false negatives, which also fixed a case with dirent as well.

@chrchr-github chrchr-github merged commit 4e769db into danmar:main Apr 12, 2025
53 checks passed
@pfultz2 pfultz2 deleted the revert-0dbc7c8e1b1db2399eaa3e6ad172597d7a3aa2bd branch April 12, 2025 20:03
chrchr-github pushed a commit to chrchr-github/cppcheck that referenced this pull request Apr 13, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants