Iox #498 remove unreachable code

[dkroenke]

Pre-Review Checklist for the PR Author

1. Branch follows the naming format (iox-#123-this-is-a-branch)
2. Commits messages are according to this guideline
   • Commit messages have the issue ID (iox-#123 commit text)
   • Commit messages are signed (git commit -s)
   • Commit author matches Eclipse Contributor Agreement (and ECA is signed)
3. Update the PR title
   • Follow the same conventions as for commit messages
   • Link to the relevant issue
4. Relevant issues are linked
5. Add sensible notes for the reviewer
6. All checks have passed
7. Assign PR to reviewer

Notes for Reviewer

Fix Findings from deepcode.ai

Checklist for the PR Reviewer

• Commits are properly organized and messages are according to the guideline
• Code according to our coding style and naming conventions
• Unit tests have been written for new behavior
• Public API changes are documented via doxygen
• Copyright owner are updated in the changed files
• PR title describes the changes

Post-review Checklist for the PR Author

1. All open points are addressed and tracked via issues

Post-review Checklist for the Eclipse Committer

1. All checkboxes in the PR checklist are checked or crossed out
2. Merge

References

• Closes deepcode.ai on iceoryx #498

[elBoberido]

while it's nice to have something like this, I won't be able to fix anything deepcode is complaining about since it requires a login with my github account and I'm not willing to give them my data

[dkroenke]

while it's nice to have something like this, I won't be able to fix anything deepcode is complaining about since it requires a login with my github account and I'm not willing to give them my data

Ok understood, i see this as a proposal for doing some checks on the code. When the deepcode is inconsistent to other tools and some of the developers will not work with it then we maybe should not take it.
I leave this as draft open for discussion.

[elBoberido]

It also depends how the errors are made accessible. If it's possible to access them without a login to their service, then it's a non issue.

[mossmaurice]

Thanks for giving deepcode.ai a try! While having more and more badges is of course great, we have to make sure developers are not overwhelmed by warning of several tools. From my experience this leads to most developers ignoring the warnings if there are too many and especially accessible on different websites/services. I'd suggest to pick one or two tools and once developers are used to them, we might continue adding more. As discussed in #409 Axivion will be added in the coming months. @dejanpan suggested VectorCast here. This could be a good replacement for codecov in the future, but of course we have to contact Vector regarding licensing beforehand.

[dkroenke]

It also depends how the errors are made accessible. If it's possible to access them without a login to their service, then it's a non issue.

Unfortunately not i guess, you need to have an account there which can be created via Github to scan and see the results.
I came to the conclusion that we will not have a check on deepcode.ai and i will remove the badge until this is clarified. The other changes can be merged.

[elBoberido]

Could you please rename the PR title

Review points are integrated