Cppcheck suppressions set 56 #38744
Open
Cppcheck suppressions set 56 #38744
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Py_RETURN_NONE renamed to Py_NONE and return removed (now to be done manually) as not used anywhere else and was confusing cppcheck with missing return. Had to make lambda function wrapper if wanted to return const pointer in AlgorithmProperty.cpp Co-authored-by: Mohamed Almaki <MohamedAlmaki@users.noreply.github.com>
RichardWaiteSTFC
force-pushed
the
cppcheck_set56
branch
from
0f31aaf to
4cdedb9
Compare
|
Cancelling other tests as it seems there are genuine failures |
sf1919
added
the
Maintenance
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/AlgorithmProperty.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
MohamedAlmaki
force-pushed
the
cppcheck_set56
branch
from
4cdedb9 to
53c7a22
Compare
|
This is ready for review as I resolved the issue, do you have any additions? @RichardWaiteSTFC |
No, thanks for setting ready to review and for fixing the above issue! |
GuiMacielPereira
requested changes
Feb 5, 2025
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/IFunction1D.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
RichardWaiteSTFC
force-pushed
the
cppcheck_set56
branch
from
22356ce to
53c7a22
Compare
GuiMacielPereira
requested changes
Feb 13, 2025
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/IPeakFunction.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/IFunction1D.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
….cpp Co-authored-by: Gui Maciel Pereira <80104863+GuiMacielPereira@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gui Maciel Pereira <80104863+GuiMacielPereira@users.noreply.github.com>
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
GuiMacielPereira
requested changes
Feb 19, 2025
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/IFunction1D.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/IPeakFunction.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Gui Maciel Pereira <80104863+GuiMacielPereira@users.noreply.github.com>
….cpp Co-authored-by: Gui Maciel Pereira <80104863+GuiMacielPereira@users.noreply.github.com>
GuiMacielPereira
approved these changes
Feb 19, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think these changes are good to go now. Maybe @jhaigh0 and @thomashampson can have a look at the cstyleCast suppression to confirm it.
Comment on lines
+42
to
+43
| static const AlgorithmProperty *(*const createPropertyWithValidator)(const std::string &, const IValidator *) = | ||
| +[](const std::string &name, const IValidator *validator) -> const AlgorithmProperty * { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you explain this syntax?
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of work
There is no associated issue. Part of cpp hackathon
Report to: @cailafinn
To test:
CI passes
This does not require release notes because will not affect the user
Reviewer
Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.
Code Review
Functional Tests
Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of
@mantidproject/gatekeeperswill take care of it.Gatekeeper
If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.