Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not so sure
typeTokis meaningful if it's not preceded bynew. I believe in the test cases it's just a(. If we want to bail out here I think it's enough to determine that it's passed to a constructor.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand. Using git blame I traced those lines back to 23deadb370 and 54b9fa5523. It seems to me like they are there for a reason. Maybe they are unnecessary, but I feel that should be a separate PR.
Edit: nevermind sorry I see the issue. I will see about reducing these checks.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tried removing different subsets of the checks and something like
based on your suggestion about checking if it's passed to a constructor but wasn't able to pass all test cases. I've got to do some other work so likely won't be able to solve this today. It might be a bit beyond my limited knowledge as most of my cppcheck hacking has been focused on the front end.