Advice needed about some cppcheck reports
Stephan Bergmann
sbergman at redhat.com
Wed May 30 01:04:05 PDT 2012
On 05/28/2012 06:03 PM, julien2412 wrote:
> [sal/osl/unx/file.cxx:1261] -> [sal/osl/unx/file.cxx:1261]: (style) Same
> expression on both sides of '-'.
> 1257 if (nSize> 0)
> 1258 {
> 1259 c^= pData[0];
> 1260 pData += nSize;
> 1261 nSize -= nSize;
> 1262 }
> Just put nSize to 0 ?
>
> Same thing here :
> [sal/osl/w32/file.cxx:880] -> [sal/osl/w32/file.cxx:880]: (style) Same
> expression on both sides of '-'.
> 876 if (nSize> 0)
> 877 {
> 878 c ^= pData[0];
> 879 pData += nSize;
> 880 nSize -= nSize;
> 881 }
In both of the above cases, the updates of both pData and nSize can be
removed completely from these "overspill" if-blocks, as the variables
are not used any more afterwards.
>
> And here :
> [filter/source/graphicfilter/icgm/cgm.cxx:269] ->
> [filter/source/graphicfilter/icgm/cgm.cxx:269]: (style) Same expression on
> both sides of '-'.
> 267 if ( pLong[ nSwitch ]< 0 )
> 268 {
> 269 nRetValue -= nRetValue;
> 270 }
> 271 nRetValue /= 65536;
I'd second Lubos here, that from looking at just the code in
CGM::ImplGetFloat (but not understanding any of the context), "nRetValue
= -nRetValue" is most likely what is meant instead.
Stephan
More information about the LibreOffice
mailing list