From: Matheus K. Ferst <matheus.fe...@eldorado.org.br>
> Hi Cédric,
>
> The only change was the helper name that is now uppercase, so nothing new
> here. The underlying cause is that dfp_finalize_decimal64 only sets
> dfp->vt.VsrD(1) and set_dfp64 receives a pointer to the complete struct.
>
> But since set_dfp64 also only access VsrD(1), it shouldn't be a real
> problem AFAICT. The same applies to CID 1465776~1465786 and
> 1465788~1465790.
Right. Coverity is probably reporting these as new just because the helper
macros were re-written as part of the move to decodetree.
I believe these should be marked as false positives.
We *could* also wrap set_dfp{64,128} in new macros that would then reference
only the appropriate parts of dfp, but, in this case, I don't think it's worth
the trouble.
Thanks,
--
Luis Pires
Instituto de Pesquisas ELDORADO
Aviso Legal - Disclaimer <https://www.eldorado.org.br/disclaimer.html>
