Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2018 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi Luke, all

It does not matter that variableScope is a low priority issue or a can be
dangerous . If someone want to disable a check it can be disabled
explictiely (I guess).
The main point that this change seems to simply reduce the scope of
cppcheck. If this is the purpose then we can just run cppcheck on an empty
file and so we won't see any issue (all false positives will disappear).

Overall, does this report have a higher signal-to-noise ratio than our
current weekly report?

@Luke
You do ask it? Was it not you how came up with the idea to reduce the false
positives with specifying the includes? Now you are asking others what the
result of your change. I'm sure it used to happen in the opposite direction.

It does not make any sense to have two reports if the only difference is
that first report contains less bugs than the other, if the filtering has
no logical meaning.

Best Regards,
Tamás

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.