Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 05/26/2013 10:05 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
Reported by cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller stefanbel...@googlemail.com
---
fast-import.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fast-import.c b/fast-import.c
index 5f539d7..0142e3a
Reported by cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller stefanbel...@googlemail.com
---
fast-import.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fast-import.c b/fast-import.c
index 5f539d7..0142e3a 100644
--- a/fast-import.c
+++ b/fast-import.c
@@ -2914,7 +2914,7 @@ static
On 05/26/2013 10:05 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
Reported by cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller stefanbel...@googlemail.com
---
fast-import.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fast-import.c b/fast-import.c
index 5f539d7..0142e3a 100644
---
It's not done very often.
For example at the very same place of the patch there is
const char *p; not assigned.
Well you could argue, that it can be detected by gcc as that variable p
is assigned next line.
So another counterexample, having the same pattern would be
fast-import.c line 2992 in
The line in question was not fixed up, but originally added in
85c6239. However I see your point, it may reintroduce warnings.
Regards,
Stefan
On 05/26/2013 10:17 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 05/26/2013 10:14 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
It's not done very often.
Of course; it's done only in
5 matches
Mail list logo
