Coverity doing scans of Wine codebase!
truiken at gmail.com
Thu Apr 6 20:38:55 CDT 2006
On 4/6/06, Troy Rollo <wine at troy.rollo.name> wrote:
> Some of the "bugs" it picks up are cases of defensive programming, such as
> checking for a NULL pointer even though the NULL pointer is impossible, given
> the functioning of routines that are being called. What should the policy be
> on such bugs - should we remove the unnecessary check or keep the
> extra-defensive code?
In most internal functions we should not have the check so we crash if
we ever send in a NULL ptr (in cases where we should never send in
NULL.) Mosts of the win32 API should have checks, but the test suite
verifies these for sure.
More information about the wine-devel