Oliver Stöneberg
Oliver Stöneberg
@danmar There are no references to this anywhere in the repo. It looks to me like these were for some older CI integrations (Travis?) and can be removed.
This is based on the fact that it should take a list of characters and requires the TODO added in https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/pull/7353#discussion_r1981610577 to be resolved first.
https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qlist.html#details > [QVector\](https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qvector.html) used to be a different class in Qt 5, but is now a simple alias to QList. > Note: QList in Qt 5 did not always have...
There is a whole official blog post about it: https://www.qt.io/blog/qlist-changes-in-qt-6
It was our only usage of `QVector` and makes things more consistent.
I tried to do this via an option. It would be possible to pass this as an internal field via the `Settings` but it would be problematic to get that...
The idea is to have a corpus generated from all our test cases which will generate an artifact which can be pulled from the OSS-Fuzz integration to be used. This...
Okay - this appears to be quite a mess (surprise, surprise). The function declaration stuff has lots of other cases. And I am also seeing function calls getting through which...
> And I am also seeing function calls getting through which do not seem to be recognized as such. I wonder if that is a chicken/egg issue. In the `--dump`...
I think we can reorder the if-chain in `parsedecl()` to move up some checks to improve things.