Found with bin/find-unneeded-includes
Only removal proposals are dealt with here.
Change-Id: I9dd7984affc4343f148c66077feaac19176adf51
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/68769
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.com>
largely based on the relevant portion of the unusedfields loplugin, but
adapted for local vars
Change-Id: Ic522a941573940e8f75c88f90ba5f37508ca49b1
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/66835
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
Since it is now possible to use C++14, it's time to replace
the temporary solution with the standard one
Change-Id: I9a20a58c68d12656359dcaa060d8ab41f621af32
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/66262
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
V668 There is no sense in testing the 'pProc' pointer against null, as the
memory was allocated using the 'new' operator. The exception will be
generated in the case of memory allocation error.
Change-Id: Iec65fd44fa947a2402da33510c29730a46c2e1a4
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/62424
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Mike Kaganski <mike.kaganski@collabora.com>
Found with bin/find-unneeded-includes
Only removal proposals are dealt with here.
Change-Id: I444c43b9d549977039f25bec2b5bf666c3e15e0e
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/62041
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
V668 There is no sense in testing the 'pChan' pointer against null, as the
memory was allocated using the 'new' operator. The exception will be
generated in the case of memory allocation error.
Change-Id: I1cb78c27da753525f05de2d3a0b74c894b07528e
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/62124
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Mike Kaganski <mike.kaganski@collabora.com>
...warning about (for now only) functions and variables with external linkage
that likely don't need it.
The problems with moving entities into unnamed namespacs and breaking ADL
(as alluded to in comments in compilerplugins/clang/external.cxx) are
illustrated by the fact that while
struct S1 { int f() { return 0; } };
int f(S1 s) { return s.f(); }
namespace N {
struct S2: S1 { int f() { return 1; } };
int f(S2 s) { return s.f(); }
}
int main() { return f(N::S2()); }
returns 1, both moving just the struct S2 into an nunnamed namespace,
struct S1 { int f() { return 0; } };
int f(S1 s) { return s.f(); }
namespace N {
namespace { struct S2: S1 { int f() { return 1; } }; }
int f(S2 s) { return s.f(); }
}
int main() { return f(N::S2()); }
as well as moving just the function f overload into an unnamed namespace,
struct S1 { int f() { return 0; } };
int f(S1 s) { return s.f(); }
namespace N {
struct S2: S1 { int f() { return 1; } };
namespace { int f(S2 s) { return s.f(); } }
}
int main() { return f(N::S2()); }
would each change the program to return 0 instead.
Change-Id: I4d09f7ac5e8f9bcd6e6bde4712608444b642265c
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/60539
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
so we can avoid temporary copies when appending a substring of an
OUString to the buffer. I would have preferred to call the method just
"append" but that results in ambiguous method errors when the callsite
is something like
sal_Int32 n;
OUStringBuffer s;
s.append(n, 10);
I'm not sure why
Change-Id: I6b5b6641fcb5b26ce2269f89ef06e03c0b6aa76f
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/58666
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
...by removing explicitly user-provided functions that do the same as their
implicitly-defined counterparts, but may prevent implicitly declared copy
functions from being defined as non-deleted in the future. (Even if a dtor was
declared non-inline in an include file, the apparently-used implicitly-defined
copy functions are already inline, so why bother with a non-inline dtor.)
Change-Id: I8a31ab0c806cb0f3c226d217f152a205aff6c07f
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/58065
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
Whatever may or may not advance or put back nLineIdx, if there's
no progress at the end return false so we don't end up in an
endless loop with the next NextSym() starting at the same
position.
Change-Id: I7084fea073490c15b8ff5abb3781ac82cdccd6d6
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/56029
Reviewed-by: Eike Rathke <erack@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Jenkins
when we see a unaryoperator, unless it's one of a small set, we can
know (mostly) that the field will not be written.
there is still a small risk of false+ with code taking references
via conditional expressions.
Change-Id: I96fa808067576a50e5eaf425338e225b4e0bdd4e
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/53263
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
auto-rewrite with <https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/47798/> "Enable
loplugin:cstylecast for some more cases" plus
solenv/clang-format/reformat-formatted-files
Change-Id: I20b38196ee1b6a34384dc46d9de1b6e1b44947ae
... in case we have a runtime instance already. Only used for
scanning date literals in source so not frequently used, otherwise
we could remember a non-runtime instance formatter somewhere.
Change-Id: I1146860c4b0aa4091708c22e498a6f720d6c7a13
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/45232
Reviewed-by: Eike Rathke <erack@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Eike Rathke <erack@redhat.com>
Andrea Gelmini