[Coverity] Uninitialized members #27071
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mhpanah
force-pushed
the
coverity_fix
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0c66ad5 to
1cc48dc
Compare
yeonbok
approved these changes
Nov 21, 2024
auto-merge was automatically disabled
November 21, 2024 17:09
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
mhpanah
force-pushed
the
coverity_fix
branch
from
1cc48dc to
5be2894
Compare
p-durandin
approved these changes
Nov 22, 2024
mhpanah
force-pushed
the
coverity_fix
branch
from
5be2894 to
4078f44
Compare
|
build_jenkins |
praasz
approved these changes
Nov 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Details:
Regarding CID: 1559222 and 1559203. This could be false positive since the class IncreasePositionIdsPrecision does not have any member variables that need initialization. I updated line 50 to ensure 'this' pointer is properly captured.
Regarding CID: 1559220 and 1559209. This could also be a false positive. To address this issue I'm proposing to explicitly call the base class constructor in the initializer list of the constructor.
Need to re-run the Coverity scan to confirm fix.
Tickets: