To make coverity happy we might be able to suppress this false alarm by adding a line like below:
``` /* coverity[SWAPPED_ARGUMENTS] */ lseg_closept_lseg(result, l2, l1); ``` >From my point of view it's better to also put some comments for humans to understand why we are passing l1 and l2 in reverse order. On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 1:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Hello guys. Coverity complained about this patch as below. What, if > anything, should be done about it? One solution is to mark it as a > false-positive in Coverity, of course. > > On 2018-Jul-29, scan-ad...@coverity.com wrote: > > > ** CID 1438146: API usage errors (SWAPPED_ARGUMENTS) > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > ____________________________________________ > > *** CID 1438146: API usage errors (SWAPPED_ARGUMENTS) > > /srv/coverity/git/pgsql-git/postgresql/src/backend/utils/adt/geo_ops.c: > 2647 in close_lseg() > > 2641 LSEG *l1 = PG_GETARG_LSEG_P(0); > > 2642 LSEG *l2 = PG_GETARG_LSEG_P(1); > > 2643 Point *result; > > 2644 > > 2645 result = (Point *) palloc(sizeof(Point)); > > 2646 > > >>> CID 1438146: API usage errors (SWAPPED_ARGUMENTS) > > >>> The positions of arguments in the call to "lseg_closept_lseg" do > not match the ordering of the parameters: > > * "l2" is passed to "l1" > > * "l1" is passed to "l2" > > 2647 lseg_closept_lseg(result, l2, l1); > > 2648 > > 2649 PG_RETURN_POINT_P(result); > > 2650 } > > 2651 > > 2652 > > -- > Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services > >
