[Interest] Klocwork errors in Qt

[Massimiliano Maini]

On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 21:57, Roland Hughes <roland at logikalsolutions.com>
wrote:

>
> On 12/14/19 2:54 PM, Massimiliano Maini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 15:12, Roland Hughes
> > <roland at logikalsolutions.com <mailto:roland at logikalsolutions.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >     On 12/9/19 5:00 AM, Massimiliano Maini wrote:
> >     > On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 19:41, Max Paperno<max-l at wdg.us
> >     <mailto:max-l at wdg.us>>  wrote:
> >     >
> >     >> On 12/4/2019 9:31 AM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> >     >>> If you think auto won't be removed as a failed experiment, how
> >     about
> >     >> "new"? Deprecated in C++20 and slated for removal in C++23.
> >     >>> https://www.modernescpp.com/index.php/no-new-new
> >     >>> Some more reading on the removal of pointers
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >
> https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/04/01/cpp-will-no-longer-have-pointers/
> >     >> TL;DR: This was a 2018 April Fool's joke.
> >     >>
> >     > Ouch. That must hurt.
> >
> >     Gosh no. I'm more stunned that only one person got it. That was an
> >     incredibly well written post. Everyone should read it. Too many QML
> >     users I guess.
> >
> >
> > By pure chance I happen to occasionally read that blog
> > (https://www.fluentcpp.com/
> > <https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/04/01/cpp-will-no-longer-have-pointers/
> >).
> > Even by picking only two random articles anybody could see that the
> > ideas it promotes
> > are at the total opposite of yours.
> >
> > Let me speculate on how it went: you googled some random keywords,
> > clicked on
> > one of the top links pointing to a blog you've never heard of,
> > overlooked the title and
> > wrongly concluded that this just confirms you're right without
> > noticing it was an April's
> > fool.
> >
> > Now, trying to turn the whole thing in your favor is something not
> > even a fool would try.
> > But apparently you are willing to give it a go. Unsurprisingly, I'd say.
> >
> > Yawn.
> >
> You make the assumption that it wasn't deliberate. Not a safe assumption.
>

Yeah, I make that assumption and I'm fairly comfortable in taking the
associated (nanoscopic)
risk.

The day you want to start talking about your own assumptions with respect
the competency
level of anybody else than you on this mailing list, let us know.

Other than that, I do hope the mailing list has an archive somewhere. On
the off chance any
newcomer gets impressd by your 200 lines, totally offtopic and rambling
replies advocatng
some crazy security policy or whatever.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20191214/d79469ce/attachment.html>