gcc warning in inspector protocol implementation

[targos]

[1934/2890] CXX obj/gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/libnode.Protocol.o
gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/Protocol.cpp: In member function ‘virtual std::unique_ptr<node::inspector::protocol::Value> node::inspector::protocol::DictionaryValue::clone() const’:
gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/Protocol.cpp:698:21: warning: redundant move in return statement [-Wredundant-move]
  698 |     return std::move(result);
      |            ~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~
gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/Protocol.cpp:698:21: note: remove ‘std::move’ call
gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/Protocol.cpp: In member function ‘virtual std::unique_ptr<node::inspector::protocol::Value> node::inspector::protocol::ListValue::clone() const’:
gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/Protocol.cpp:739:21: warning: redundant move in return statement [-Wredundant-move]
  739 |     return std::move(result);
      |            ~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~
gen/src/node/inspector/protocol/Protocol.cpp:739:21: note: remove ‘std::move’ call

[himself65]

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/return

[sam-github]

https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/deps/inspector_protocol/+/2057545

[targos]

@sam-github you should mark the patch as ready for review

[sam-github]

OK, I figured out how to do that. Obviously if I want someone else to review something... I have to "start review". 🤕

[sam-github]

@targos I'd have to find who in IBM has legal authority to sign a contributor agreement for me, but honestly, I'm not sure if its worth it. I might get to it next week, but maybe you want to PR the fix? I give the code to you if you want it.

[mmarchini]

@sam-github since IBM already have folks contributing to V8, you probably already have a signed agreement. If that's the case, using your IBM email shot be enough.

[sam-github]

I can't see any way to change the owner of a CL, and it looked like I needed a agreement that specifically mentioned me, and my company.EDIT: I abandoned the CL, its easier for the maintainers to just fix it than to go through the CL process with an external contributor. Sorry, @targos.

[mmarchini]

They might not push the changes since you proposed it first to avoid any legal issues (I know, I know). Hopefully that's not the case.

I can't see any way to change the owner of a CL

Not possible AFAIK, you would need to resubmit it.

it looked like I needed a agreement that specifically mentioned me, and my company

Larger companies usually have a company-wide signed CLA with open source projects, and discourage (or disallow) individual signatures. Of course, maybe IBM handles this differently, but having a company-wide signature is also recommended by the "Legal Stuff" they referenced:

"All contributors must complete the contributor license agreement. For individual contributors, please complete the Individual Contributor License Agreement online. Corporate contributors must fill out the Corporate Contributor License Agreement and send it to us as described on that page."