On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 12:51 -0800, julien2412 wrote:
Similarly, there's CID#708952 (see
https://scan5.coverity.com:8443/reports.htm#v22002/p10276/fileInstanceId=47973599defectInstanceId=14481123mergedDefectId=708952).
FWIW, CID#708952 is fixed now
C.
On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 09:17 -0800, julien2412 wrote:
Hi,
I took a look to
https://scan5.coverity.com:8443/reports.htm#v22002/p10276/fileInstanceId=47958646defectInstanceId=14481124mergedDefectId=708945
32class SbxVarEntry : public SbxVariableRef {
33public:
34OUString* pAlias;
35
use this macro but it could be mean
other cases (destructor not called) like this.
Any suggestion?
Julien
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO-scan-coverity-708945-non-virtual-destructor-in-parent-class-tp4087082.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive
be taken into
account since destructor of SfxUndoArray isn't virtual
(see http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/include/svl/undo.hxx#136)
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO-scan-coverity-708945-non-virtual-destructor-in-parent-class-tp4087082p4087118.html
http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/include/svl/undo.hxx#136)
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO-scan-coverity-708945-non-virtual-destructor-in-parent-class-tp4087082p4087118.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com
