Skip to content
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

Cppcheck fixes #1760

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Sep 24, 2019

Conversation

@Xav83
Copy link
Contributor

Xav83 commented Sep 19, 2019

This Pull Request corrects two of the warnings reported by cppcheck, mentionned in #1759

A warning about an unnecessary check in the first commit, and a warning about a code enhancement in the second warning, by using the std::accumulate function instead of a raw loop.


Pull request checklist

Read the Contribution Guidelines for detailed information.

  • Changes are described in the pull request, or an existing issue is referenced.
  • The test suite compiles and runs without error.
  • Code coverage is 100%. Test cases can be added by editing the test suite.
  • The source code is amalgamated; that is, after making changes to the sources in the include/nlohmann directory, run make amalgamate to create the single-header file single_include/nlohmann/json.hpp. The whole process is described here.

Please don't

  • The C++11 support varies between different compilers and versions. Please note the list of supported compilers. Some compilers like GCC 4.7 (and earlier), Clang 3.3 (and earlier), or Microsoft Visual Studio 13.0 and earlier are known not to work due to missing or incomplete C++11 support. Please refrain from proposing changes that work around these compiler's limitations with #ifdefs or other means.
  • Specifically, I am aware of compilation problems with Microsoft Visual Studio (there even is an issue label for these kind of bugs). I understand that even in 2016, complete C++11 support isn't there yet. But please also understand that I do not want to drop features or uglify the code just to make Microsoft's sub-standard compiler happy. The past has shown that there are ways to express the functionality such that the code compiles with the most recent MSVC - unfortunately, this is not the main objective of the project.
  • Please refrain from proposing changes that would break JSON conformance. If you propose a conformant extension of JSON to be supported by the library, please motivate this extension.
  • Please do not open pull requests that address multiple issues.
binary_reader.hpp:650: (style) Unsigned expression 'mant' can't be negative so it is unnecessary to test it

https://github.com/Xav83/nlohmann-json-cppcheck/commit/910a7d2b873dd7ae92ec81cced2bf73200ff4848/checks#step:5:84

Signed-off-by: Xav83 <x.jouvenot@gmail.com>
@Xav83 Xav83 force-pushed the Xav83:cppcheckFixes branch from 708b16a to 1667541 Sep 19, 2019
@Xav83 Xav83 force-pushed the Xav83:cppcheckFixes branch 2 times, most recently from d43728f to 0605a2e Sep 20, 2019
Xav83 added 2 commits Sep 19, 2019
binary_writer.hpp:869: (style) Consider using std::accumulate algorithm instead of a raw loop.

https://github.com/Xav83/nlohmann-json-cppcheck/commit/910a7d2b873dd7ae92ec81cced2bf73200ff4848/checks#step:5:107

Signed-off-by: Xav83 <x.jouvenot@gmail.com>
@Xav83 Xav83 force-pushed the Xav83:cppcheckFixes branch from 0605a2e to 87afee1 Sep 20, 2019
@coveralls

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

coveralls commented Sep 20, 2019

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 87afee1 on Xav83:cppcheckFixes into 771d5da on nlohmann:develop.

@Xav83

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Xav83 commented Sep 20, 2019

I don't understand why the Travis job with Xcode 9.3 fails, but I found a ninja issue similar to the error message.

And errors found by Code Inspector aren't referencing the code I modified. So, should I fix them or should they be fixed in another Pull Request ?

Copy link
Owner

nlohmann left a comment

Looks good to me.

@nlohmann

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

nlohmann commented Sep 24, 2019


🔖 Release item

This issue/PR will be part of the next release of the library. This template helps preparing the release notes.

Type

  • New Feature
  • 🐛 Bug Fix
  • ⚡️ Improvement
  • 🔨 Further Change
  • 🔥 Deprecated function

Description

  • Fixed some Cppcheck warnings.

@nlohmann nlohmann merged commit e2c531a into nlohmann:develop Sep 24, 2019
7 of 9 checks passed
7 of 9 checks passed
Code Inspector - Pull Request Code Review (Beta) Code Inspector detected some issues with this pull request
Details
code-inspector/violations code inspector found 2 more violation(s) in the new code
Details
LGTM analysis: C/C++ No new or fixed alerts
Details
LGTM analysis: JavaScript No code changes detected
Details
LGTM analysis: Python No code changes detected
Details
code-inspector/duplicates No duplicate added or removed
Details
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
coverage/coveralls Coverage remained the same at 100.0%
Details
@nlohmann

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

nlohmann commented Sep 24, 2019

Thanks a lot!

@Xav83 Xav83 deleted the Xav83:cppcheckFixes branch Sep 24, 2019
@t-b t-b referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.