New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GCC 8 Compiler Warnings, Minor Reco Fixes #24227
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-24227/5931 |
A new Pull Request was created by @wddgit (W. David Dagenhart) for master. It involves the following packages: RecoBTag/Combined @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
@@ -84,11 +84,13 @@ class FastLineRecognition | |||
double Saw, Sbw, Sw, S1; | |||
double weight; | |||
double min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jan-kaspar
please take a look.
Can we instead remove min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b
?
@@ -84,11 +84,13 @@ class FastLineRecognition | |||
double Saw, Sbw, Sw, S1; | |||
double weight; | |||
double min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b; | |||
bool firstCallToAdd = true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you remove min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b, then you can also get rid of firstCallToAdd
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
By the way: is there any reason for having all these class members and methods "protected" instead of "private"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree. If we delete min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b, then there is no reason for firstCallToAdd to exist. I would be happy to delete them all from the PR. Do you want me to do that?
In the repository nothing inherits from FastLineRecognition. Unless there is something outside the repository that I do not understand, there is no reason for these to be protected. Do you want me to change protected to private also?
"W. David Dagenhart" <notifications@github.com> ha scritto:
wddgit commented on this pull request.
> @@ -84,11 +84,13 @@ class FastLineRecognition
double Saw, Sbw, Sw, S1;
double weight;
double min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b;
+ bool firstCallToAdd = true;
I agree. If we delete min_a, max_a, min_b, max_b, then there is no
reason for firstCallToAdd to exist. I would be happy to delete them
all from the PR. Do you want me to do that?
Yes, please
In the repository nothing inherits from FastLineRecognition. Unless
there is something outside the repository that I do not understand,
there is no reason for these to be protected. Do you want me to
change protected to private also?
Not even outside it (I checked). Maybe it was planned at the beginning...
Yes, please.
…
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#24227 (comment)
|
Two fixes included here and neither should affect behavior. One modifies the extent of an unnamed namespace. It was maybe inconsistent before, but not a real problem. The other deletes some uninitialized variables which were also not used for anything.
fe54886
to
460f8bc
Compare
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-24227/6049 |
please test @perrotta I made the changes you requested. Both improvements. Thanks. |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
Two fixes included here and neither should affect
behavior. One modifies the extent of an unnamed
namespace. It was maybe inconsistent before, but
not a real problem. The other initializes some
uninitialized variables. A real bug, but these
variables are not used anywhere (alternately we
could delete them).