Re: Coverity Scan for GNUstep?

[Fred Kiefer]

> Am 25.01.2018 um 00:59 schrieb Ivan Vučica <address@hidden>:
> 
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Ivan Vučica <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:23 PM, Fred Kiefer <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In the meantime my connection with GNUstep has been confirmed and I was 
>>> able to look at the found issues. Many of them are false positives mostly 
>>> caused by Coverity expecting normal program continuation after NSException 
>>> raise.
>> 
>> Some of this type of issues can be fixed with __attribute__ ((noreturn)).
>> 
>> Manual says "The attribute noreturn is not implemented in GCC versions
>> earlier than 2.5." which is older than what we support, so it should
>> be fine.
>> 
>> Even though it's just silencing this warning, I'm nonetheless creating
>> a patch for gdomap.
> 
> Please disregard the mention of creating a patch for gdomap.c.
> 
> I've taken a closer look only a few seconds after posting this and it
> looks like gdomap_log exits only sometimes, so the 'breaks are
> missing' warning is probably correct.
> 
> I won't be creating the patch adding noreturn.

I was hoping you would provide such a patch for the NSException methods that 
won’t return. That was the type of false positives that showed up the most in 
the Coverity list.