11dd3c09ce
Change every 'tokAt(1)->' to 'next()->' because 'tokAt(1) == 0' is equivalent to 'next() == 0', hence the equivalent cppcheck crash.
2011-11-20 15:09:57 +01:00
6f8e42a5af
changed the astyle formatting flags
2011-10-13 20:53:06 +02:00
cf39ece8da
Fixed #3150 (Invalid warning when pointer difference is not adjacent)
2011-10-12 19:01:44 +02:00
c34b77cebf
Fixed #3073 (False positive: Assigning an integer (int/long/etc) to a pointer is not portable)
2011-09-04 13:03:29 +02:00
d23c58d387
enable: break out 'performance' and 'portability' from the 'style' id. Ticket: #3074
2011-09-03 15:30:30 +02:00
cfcfa3f000
Use "enabled" list for the style checking.
...
Settings-class currently enables style checking via dedicated
boolean attribute. All other CLI's enable-options are handled
through the enable-list. This commit moves style-check enabling
to use the enable-list.
Main advantage is the consistency how options are handled/stored
in the Settings class. Which also unifies using them for the other
code. You need to enable certain type of checks? Use the
addEnabled()-method. You want to check if certain type of checks
are enabled? Use the isEnabled()-method.
2011-08-07 10:28:52 +03:00
35178cc161
Fixed #2912 (false positive: (portability) Assigning an integer (int/long/etc) to a pointer is not portable)
2011-07-16 17:08:03 +02:00
66d145ba1c
Fixed #2892 (false positive: (portability) Assigning an address value to the integer (int/long/etc) type is not portable)
2011-07-07 15:14:33 +02:00
4055b0ec5f
64-bit portability: fixed two of the TODO test cases. Ticket: #2791
2011-07-06 17:57:39 +02:00
827fb01ec1
updated error message about assigning address to integer. Thanks Kimmo for the suggestion.
2011-07-06 12:57:45 +02:00
8f0f184058
64-bit checking: Added simple check for assigning pointer address to int/long. Ticket: #2791
2011-07-06 08:55:17 +02:00
Edoardo Prezioso
Daniel Marjamäki
Kimmo Varis