> On 25 Jan 2018, at 07:41, Fred Kiefer <fredkie...@gmx.de> wrote: > > > >> Am 25.01.2018 um 00:59 schrieb Ivan Vučica <i...@vucica.net>: >> >> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Ivan Vučica <i...@vucica.net> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:23 PM, Fred Kiefer <fredkie...@gmx.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> In the meantime my connection with GNUstep has been confirmed and I was >>>> able to look at the found issues. Many of them are false positives mostly >>>> caused by Coverity expecting normal program continuation after NSException >>>> raise. >>> >>> Some of this type of issues can be fixed with __attribute__ ((noreturn)). >>> >>> Manual says "The attribute noreturn is not implemented in GCC versions >>> earlier than 2.5." which is older than what we support, so it should >>> be fine. >>> >>> Even though it's just silencing this warning, I'm nonetheless creating >>> a patch for gdomap. >> >> Please disregard the mention of creating a patch for gdomap.c. >> >> I've taken a closer look only a few seconds after posting this and it >> looks like gdomap_log exits only sometimes, so the 'breaks are >> missing' warning is probably correct. >> >> I won't be creating the patch adding noreturn. > > I was hoping you would provide such a patch for the NSException methods that > won’t return. That was the type of false positives that showed up the most in > the Coverity list.
I'm looking into that. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev