fixed #13982 - cppcheck.cpp: do not crash if mExecuteCommand is empty
#7647
Conversation
firewave
changed the title
mExecuteCommand is emptymExecuteCommand is empty
|
This only fixes the crash when running an scratchpad analysis with a loaded projects including addons. It will now show an error instead. The execute function is not available in that context and it requires some refactoring. But I think that is something to look into in the context of https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/13976. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
firewave
force-pushed
the
scratch-addon
branch
4 times, most recently
from
988764d to
e6a6e24
Compare
|
I moved the checks from the executor tests as the code being tested was not specific to those classes and actually lives in |
… shadowed a base member variable)
| @@ -432,6 +432,9 @@ static std::vector<picojson::value> executeAddon(const AddonInfo &addonInfo, | |||
| const std::string &premiumArgs, | |||
| const CppCheck::ExecuteCmdFn &executeCommand) | |||
| { | |||
| if (!executeCommand) | |||
| throw InternalError(nullptr, "Failed to execute addon - no command callback provided"); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm.. ideally I would like to make it clear that it's a bug in cppcheck. The user should not start looking for some command callback options. but I don't have a very good suggestion..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well - it should never happen. It's kind of akin to "unreachable" code.
| @@ -686,6 +689,11 @@ unsigned int CppCheck::checkClang(const FileWithDetails &file, int fileIndex) | |||
| mErrorLogger.reportOut(exe + " " + args2, Color::Reset); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| if (!mExecuteCommand) { | |||
| std::cerr << "Failed to execute '" << exe << " " << args2 << " " << redirect2 << "' - (no command callback provided)" << std::endl; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why isn't this reported to the errorlogger. GUI does not capture stderr. And plugins will probably not write this. So the user will have no clue why it does not work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because that was never properly implemented for this. It's the same in another cases and there's TODOs in the code. Will check if we have tickets about this.
No description provided.