Hi Even, Thank you, I knew how to fix it but I was wondering if it is possible to reduce the false positives (see my other thread about spellchek on testdata), life is too short to be wasted in fighting with a dumb software :) Maybe a more recent version of cppcheck does nor have this issue?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 12:11 PM Even Rouault <[email protected]> wrote: > > On mardi 29 septembre 2020 11:55:40 CEST Alessandro Pasotti wrote: > > > Looks like cppcheck is not smart enough... > > > > Yeah, it hardly understands C++ (it doesn't need to be able to fully compile > a file to analyze it, if I remember correctly) > > > > > > > > const double factor { std::pow( 10, - mPrecisionSpinBox->value() ) }; > > > > I noticed this too. It is easily confused by curly initializer list, when > used in a method body. It might also have sometimes issues with lambdas and > variable scope. > > > > > const double factor { std::pow( 10, - mPrecisionSpinBox->value() ) }; > > > > Using ( ) or = should fix it > > > > const double factor (std::pow( 10, - mPrecisionSpinBox->value() )); > > const double factor = std::pow( 10, - mPrecisionSpinBox->value() ); > > > > Even > > > > -- > > Spatialys - Geospatial professional services > > http://www.spatialys.com -- Alessandro Pasotti QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net ItOpen: www.itopen.it _______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
