On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 21:48 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
On 03.11.2014 16:24, Caolán McNamara wrote:
705391 Inferred misuse of enum really bugs me.
xmloff/source/transform/MergeElemTContext.cxx:235 where
XML_ATACTION_MOVE_FROM_ELEM_RNG2ISO_DATETIME is from a completely
different enum than all the other cases. It looks completely bogus, but
I don't know if it should be some other condition or if that case
belongs to another switch.
that was a nasty case, fixed in commit
76dce95eed6892d729fbea2b990911edd82ded82
Excellent, that one was super-bugging me. FWIW that leaves just one
MIXED_ENUM warning left. 705369 where XML_TOK_ENCODING in
dbaccess/source/filter/xml/xmlDataSourceInfo.cxx:67 is also from an
utterly different enum from the rest of the cases :-(
C.
p.s. I want to leave 982918, 983056 and 1250404 *untriaged* or now to
find out if I have the right inline coverity markup to automark false
positives as intentional if the code is sent to a different coverity
instance than the public one.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.