cleanup: Fix a few more clang-tidy warnings.

[iphydf]

This change is 

[JFreegman]

Reviewed 98 of 98 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 0 of 1 approvals obtained (waiting on @iphydf)

---

toxcore/DHT.c line 781 at r1 (raw file):

        const IPPTsPng *ipptp = NULL;

        if (net_family_is_ipv4(sa_family) || client->assoc4.timestamp >= client->assoc6.timestamp) {

Is this an intentional logic change? Previously, we set ipptp = &client->assoc6; after confirming that sa_family is ipv6, even if client->assoc4.timestamp >= client->assoc6.timestamp. Now we set ipptp = &client->assoc4; if client->assoc4.timestamp >= client->assoc6.timestamp even if sa_family is ipv6.

---

toxcore/tox.c line 816 at r1 (raw file):

    if (tox->m == nullptr) {
        switch (m_error) {
            case MESSENGER_ERROR_PORT:

Intentional fallthrough? Should probably comment that

[iphydf]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 approvals obtained (waiting on @JFreegman)

---

toxcore/DHT.c line 781 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, JFreegman wrote…

Is this an intentional logic change? Previously, we set ipptp = &client->assoc6; after confirming that sa_family is ipv6, even if client->assoc4.timestamp >= client->assoc6.timestamp. Now we set ipptp = &client->assoc4; if client->assoc4.timestamp >= client->assoc6.timestamp even if sa_family is ipv6.

Good point. Undone.

---

toxcore/tox.c line 816 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, JFreegman wrote…

Intentional fallthrough? Should probably comment that

I usually consider "fallthrough" to be a case that does work and then doesn't break (which we don't allow). This fallthrough is effectively an "or" case. Should we document such cases (e.g. group.c:2146)?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 77.77% and project coverage change: +0.17% 🎉

Comparison is base (0c5b918) 74.49% compared to head (0cef46e) 74.66%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2406      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.49%   74.66%   +0.17%     
==========================================
  Files          87       87              
  Lines       26194    26190       -4     
==========================================
+ Hits        19512    19555      +43     
+ Misses       6682     6635      -47     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
toxcore/tox.c	63.63% <60.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️
toxcore/DHT.c	84.84% <100.00%> (+0.26%)	⬆️
toxcore/mono_time.c	94.33% <100.00%> (ø)
toxcore/net_crypto.c	87.82% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[JFreegman]

I usually consider "fallthrough" to be a case that does work and then doesn't break (which we don't allow). This fallthrough is effectively an "or" case. Should we document such cases (e.g. group.c:2146)?

Maybe I'm misremembering because I thought we already did that. It's probably not necessary.

[JFreegman]

Reviewed 96 of 96 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! 1 of 1 approvals obtained