Hi peoples Quite some repositories have enabled cppcheck with a ruleset that I more or less have composed so far. I do think it provides valuable feedback, especially if we can get the rules groomed sufficiently and fix the remaining points.
It at least have helped me with quite some bugs over time. There is though one pattern that cppcheck complains about that I'm a bit unsure if we should ask cppcheck to not complain about or if we should fix the instances. | Minor - Local variable 'foregroundColor' shadows outer function Basically, various versions of people doing | const QString foo = foo(); inside their functions. Is this a issue we should suppress at cppcheck level, or one where we should rename the variable ? There are a bit of pros and cons. The biggest argument for adapting cppcheck settings is that it is unlikely that anyone will actually be confused by this kind of shadowing, and most IDE's will help you anyways. Another big argument for doing it as a cppcheck setting is that it is normally 'the good name' for the thing in question, so the variable will be less good. Either people start adding tails_ to the variable or weird abbrvs. The biggest argument for adapting the code is that it makes things more readable for people without a IDE and for simpler search/grep in source code. (by IDE I also includue various language-server additions to editors) Does anyone have opinions here? /Sune
