Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity finds an ugly bug in wxWidgets

I agree with Ian — looks like a false positive on closer inspection. The cost of requiring braces on single-line statements is one of a reduction in signal-to-noise ratio (and I suppose less fitting on the screen). Cheers, Jeff. > On 12 Jan 2020, at 01:32, Bevan Weiss wrote: > > Is there any

[Kicad-developers] Coverity heads-up

I’ve given up chasing down all the places where we fail to catch boost exceptions. I’m removing boost::ptr_vector in favour of std::vector (which boost uses under the hood anyway). ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to :

Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity finds an ugly bug in wxWidgets

In the case of a false positive, we should just set the "Classification" to "False Positive" and the "Action" to "Ignore" so that it wont keep showing up in the report. We should also add a comment as to why it's a false positive so we know why it was marked as a false positive. Cheers, Wayne O

Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity finds an ugly bug in wxWidgets

In this case I had already added the braces around the if clause before Jeff had sent that email, so Coverity is happy with it now. -Ian On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 12:38 PM Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > In the case of a false positive, we should just set the "Classification" > to "False Positive" and t

Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity heads-up

Hi Jeff, We should probably discuss this a bit before you spend any time on it. The boost pointer containers do a lot of housekeeping under the hood that the standard c++ containers do not. This means that all of the object cloning behavior automatically handled by the boost pointer containers wi

Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity heads-up

Hi Wayne, The main one that permeates the code is CONFIG_PARAM_ARRAY. It doesn't use any of the boost::ptr_array fancy stuff. We don’t currently catch /any/ of the exceptions thrown by boost for this data structure, so that part is unchanged. What does change is the signal-to-noise ratio out

Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity heads-up

It's worth mentioning that I'm getting rid of PARAM_CFG_ARRAY in my new settings branch (should be done before FOSDEM) On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 10:31 AM Jeff Young wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > The main one that permeates the code is CONFIG_PARAM_ARRAY. It doesn't > use any of the boost::ptr_array fanc

Re: [Kicad-developers] Coverity heads-up

On 1/12/20 10:36 AM, Jon Evans wrote: > It's worth mentioning that I'm getting rid of PARAM_CFG_ARRAY in my new > settings branch (should be done before FOSDEM) Sounds like this solves half of the problem. > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 10:31 AM Jeff Young > wrote: > >