The allocation invokes some heavy ValueFlow computations. We just want
to generate an unconditional error from the analysis so use some lighter
code which does the same.
`TestThreadExecutorFiles::deadlock_with_many_errors`
Before:
```
real 0m23.517s
user 0m33.453s
sys 0m2.297s
```
After:
```
real 0m5.051s
user 0m6.234s
sys 0m0.422s
```
Added new suppress comments:
- `cppcheck-suppress-begin` and `cppcheck-suppress-end` to remove blocks
of suppression
- `cppcheck-suppress-file` to remove suppression at file level
The suppressions do not interfere with each others. For example, all the
suppressions are matched in the following code:
```c
// cppcheck-suppress-file uninitvar
void f() {
int a;
// cppcheck-suppress-begin uninitvar
// cppcheck-suppress uninitvar
a++;
// cppcheck-suppress-end uninitvar
}
```
Tickets:
https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/11902https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/8528
Currently the `AddonInfo` is generated and discarded on each addon
invocation. This leads to an unnecessary process invocation for each
addon on each file.
Also if an addon is completely broken we will still perform the whole
analysis only for it to be failed at the end so we should bail out early
if we know it doesn't work at all.
I got error messages while building `cppcheck 2.12.0` for RISC-V Arch
Linux:
```
Testing Complete
Number of tests: 4420
Number of todos: 331
Tests failed: 2
/usr/src/debug/cppcheck/cppcheck/test/testcondition.cpp:4501(TestCondition::alwaysTrue): Assertion failed.
Expected:
[test.cpp:6]: (style) Condition 'o[1]=='\0'' is always false\n
Actual:
[test.cpp:4] -> [test.cpp:6]: (style) Condition 'o[1]=='\0'' is always false\n
_____
/usr/src/debug/cppcheck/cppcheck/test/testcondition.cpp:5014(TestCondition::alwaysTrueContainer): Assertion failed.
Expected:
[test.cpp:5]: (style) Condition 'buffer.back()=='\0'' is always false\n
Actual:
[test.cpp:3] -> [test.cpp:5]: (style) Condition 'buffer.back()=='\0'' is always false\n
```
I found out the reason is that the testcases were designed for
x86/x86_64 or other `signed char` platforms (i.e. default character type
is `signed char` ), whereareas RISC-V is an `unsigned char` platform,
which causes different behavior in
`lib/valueflow.cpp:valueFlowImpossibleValues`. I'm not sure whether this
error leads from a functional bug, so if you have a better approach to
fix it, please let me know.
Maybe you could reproduce this error on x86_64 platform by setting
`defaultSign = 'u';` in `Platform::set(Type t)`.
The name was misleading as it was actually a `long long` and also if we
ever move to an (optional) 128-bit value it wouldn't even less fitting.
We should name it to match our alias type.
This is a step onto leveraging the `ThreadExecutor` implementation for
`ProcessExecutor` which is a follow-up to #4870. We need to have the
proper test coverage and the existing implementations working as
expected before we move to the shared code.
Fixes:
- added `--showtime=` tests for all executor implementations
- only print `--showtime=summary` once at the end
- prevents `--showtime=` by multiple threads to be written at the same
time - essentially breaking the output
- reset the timer results before each test
- deprecated `top5` in favor of `top5_file`
- fixed printing for all executors except `ProcessExecutor`
This is in preparation of avoiding accessing `std::cout` directly as
well as streamlining and improving the logging during the settings
parsing. There are no functional changes yet.
Based on #4701, #5418
A helper function for the `isdigit()` test should be introduced on the
simplecpp side.
Co-authored-by: gerboengels <github@gerbo.org>
We were calling several interface functions through their inherited
classes instead of using the base classes requiring us to add `friend`
declarations to make the implementations accessible. This adjusts
several of those cases.
This makes the code much more readable. It also makes it less prone to
errors because we do not need to specify the length of the string to
match and the returnvalue is clear.
The code with the bad returnvalue check was never executed and I added a
test to show that.
Windows XP Pro x64 was released on April 25, 2005 and consumer
processors supporting x86-64 have been around almost as long. Although
there are still 32-bit Windows images available there is not much of a
point maintaining support for these. We also never did any x86 builds
for non-Windows platforms in CI so we don't even know if we work on
those. You might still be able to build 32-bit binaries via CMake.
This used to be one of the longest running jobs because of the slow
setup and linking. Now it will take only ~2 minutes if everything is
cached with half the time taken up by the tests.
chrchr-github
Oliver Stöneberg
Daniel Marjamäki
orbitcowboy
Johan Bertrand
moui0
Paul Fultz II
Tomasz Edward Posluszny