-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update cppcheck and astyle versions #3037
base: devel
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
It is a bit of a mess right now and discussions are ongoing about this.
So suppressing the messages for now and leaving the |
Thanks for the update @firewave. That's an interesting link. |
Also please CC me on any future Cppcheck-related things. |
- cppcheck 2.13.0 -> 2.14.1 - astyle 3.4.12 -> 3.4.13 Release notes - https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/releases/tag/2.14.0 - https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/releases/tag/2.14.1 - https://astyle.sourceforge.net/notes.html
Version 2.14.0 of cppcheck generates errors relating to the check level (e.g.):- common/base64.c:0:0: information: Limiting analysis of branches. Use --check-level=exhaustive to analyze all branches. [normalCheckLevelMaxBranches] This does not happen with the same sources (commit f781962) under 2.13.0. This PR disables the warnings above for 2.14.0, but also allows a '-f' argument to be passed in to request an exhaustive test. This could be used (for example) before a major release. An exhaustive test takes a *lot* longer. The first run with a git runner was around an hour. The --check-level=flag was only added for 2.11.0, and so this now needs a version check.
5158e34
to
0ec084f
Compare
cppcheck version updated to 2.14.1 Check times for both normal and extensive remain unaltered from 2.14.0 @firewave - I'm unsure what the best thing to do here is. Is it likely in later versions of cppcheck that we'll regain more rational behaviour without specifying a |
Bumped astyle and cppcheck to latest versions.
There's an issue with cppcheck which I'd appreciate a comment on. Version 2.13.0 was taking around 20 minutes or so to run. With 2.14.0, I get warnings like this with the same sources:-
If I use
--check-level=exhaustive
with 2.14.0, I get check times of around an hour:-https://github.com/matt335672/xrdp/actions/runs/8781923998/job/24094941025
However, if I just disable the warnings and go with
--check-level=normal
, I'm getting run times of about 4 minutes, 30 seconds:-https://github.com/matt335672/xrdp/actions/runs/8782777220/job/24097568007
Neither option seems as good to me, but I've gone for the shorter one. A longer run can still be requested manually.
Any thoughts appreciated.