https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=474402
--- Comment #5 from Malte S. Stretz <m...@apache.org> --- I think I shouldn't have filed that upstream bug since I think this is the bug in this code (quoted from my comment on the upstream bug report): > This is release code so the Q_ASSERTs are probably not doing anything. So the > components.count() == 1 isn't catching a zero element list being added > before. And matchedComponents.at(0) would violate the requirement that the > index must exist in the list, ie. it could return anything which wouldn't be > caught by the next Q_ASSERT either. So the next line would be the first > actual request to that invalid value. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
