Jeff Latimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What is the policy for handling the dereferencing of pointers that have > previously been determined to be NULL and an ERR message has been > issued. It seems that there are many cases where Coverity has found > that the test is made but the code falls through to the dereference. In > a number of cases to a TRACE. Are we trying to throw an exception in > these cases but assuming that the problem is unlikely and not worth > further handling. Essentially, it seems that if this is the policy then > we can mark the Coverity entries as ignore. In some cases it seems that > the only problem may be the TRACE and there is no other reference which > implies that an else may solve the problem ie. > > if (!ptr) ERR "msg" > else TRACE
That sort of code doesn't make much sense. Either a null pointer is valid input and it should be handled properly, or it isn't and there's no point in having an ERR, we might as well crash and get a full backtrace. -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
