[webkit-efl] Issues from static program analysis tool(s)
kangil.han at samsung.com
Thu Jul 28 06:10:58 PDT 2011
First of all, your mention makes sense.
In this case, double check seems useless.
About my latest mention "strict view in programming", I apologize that I
generalized so much.
However, there is an argument that double check is needed because evas API
will be upgraded.
Currently, you are right, evas_object_smart_data_get() can handle NULL
But, in future, who can be sure?
>From this reason, some developers here want to minimize the effect from
external package's upgrade.
Thanks and regards,
From: Rafael Antognolli [mailto:antognolli at profusion.mobi]
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 9:48 PM
To: kangil.han at samsung.com
Cc: webkit-efl at lists.webkit.org
Subject: Re: [webkit-efl] Issues from static program analysis tool(s)
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Kangil Han <kangil.han at samsung.com> wrote:
> Dear EFL developers,
> I am writing this to hear your voices on the issues from static program
> analysis tool.
> Coverity Static Analysis can be a tool of those.
> For example, lately Ive got a below report.
> There should be null check for o in EWK_VIEW_SD_GET(o, ptr) macro.
> #define EWK_VIEW_SD_GET(o, ptr) \
> Ewk_View_Smart_Data* ptr =
> If we only look at this macro, report seems clear.
> But, when it comes to look ellE>evas_object_smart_data_get function, this
> point is not so clear.
> This is because evas_object_smart_data_get function can handle NULL
> argument of o.
> However, if we should have strict view in programming, this report makes
What do you mean by "strict view in programming"?
This macro considers that NULL is a valid value for 'o', because the
function evas_object_smart_data_get() can handle it (by checking it
internally). What benefits do you have by double checking this?
For me, that's just a false positive of the static analysis.
ProFUSION embedded systems
More information about the webkit-efl