-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
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
Cppcheck suppressions set 56 #38744
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Cppcheck suppressions set 56 #38744
Conversation
Py_RETURN_NONE renamed to Py_NONE and return removed (now to be done manually) as not used anywhere else and was confusing cppcheck with missing return. Had to make lambda function wrapper if wanted to return const pointer in AlgorithmProperty.cpp Co-authored-by: Mohamed Almaki <[email protected]>
0f31aaf
to
4cdedb9
Compare
Cancelling other tests as it seems there are genuine failures |
AlgorithmProperty *createPropertyWithValidator(const std::string &name, IValidator *validator) { | ||
return createPropertyWithValidatorAndDirection(name, validator, Mantid::Kernel::Direction::Input); | ||
} | ||
const std::function<const AlgorithmProperty *(const std::string &, const IValidator *)> createPropertyWithValidator = |
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.
@MohamedAlmaki this is causing build failures any idea why?
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.
will check out
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.
It appears that Boost::Python is having a problem reading the signature of the function pointer. I will attempt to resolve the error on my Linux machine, and if that is not possible, I may revert the change.
4cdedb9
to
53c7a22
Compare
Description of work
There is no associated issue. Part of cpp hackathon
Report to: @cailafinn
To test:
CI passes
This does not require release notes because will not affect the user
Reviewer
Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.
Code Review
Functional Tests
Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of
@mantidproject/gatekeepers
will take care of it.Gatekeeper
If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.