False postive: constParameter with gcc ternary?

[Tobias Mark]

Example:

class Foo {};
void Baz(Foo *arg);
void Bar(Foo *arg) {
      Baz(arg ?: new Foo());
}

Leads to:

style: Parameter 'arg' can be declared with const [constParameter]

Version: 2.6

This caused by the gcc extension. When using "arg ? arg : new Foo()" it is handled correctly.
Is this considered a bug or should we stop using this gcc extension?

[Daniel Marjamäki]

Is this considered a bug or should we stop using this gcc extension?

I consider it a bug. Thanks!

[Daniel Marjamäki]

I can reproduce the false positive with cppcheck-2.6 but not with cppcheck HEAD.

[Tobias Mark]

Thanks!

On a somewhat related subject. I also found an: " AST broken, ternary operator missing operand(s) internalAstError" in some crazy code in my project. Maybe it's also gone with HEAD :)

class Foo {};
bool check();
Foo* bar(){
    std::vector<Foo*> vec;
    std::vector<Foo*>::iterator it1 = vec.begin();
    std::vector<Foo*>::iterator it2 = vec.begin();
    // Error here
    Foo* res = check() ? (delete *it2, *it1) : (delete *it1, *it2);
    return res;
 }

Seems to be the combination of deref and delete. Similar Problems:

    Foo* res = *(check() ? (delete *it2, it1) : (delete *it1, it2));
    std::vector<Foo*>::iterator it3 = true ? (delete *it2, it1) : (delete *it1, it2);

No Problem:

    Foo* res = check() ? (dummy(*it2), *it1) : (dummy(*it1), *it2);

    Foo* f1 = new Foo();
    Foo* f2 = new Foo();
    Foo* res = check() ? (delete f1, f2) : (delete f2, f1);

[CHR]

Tikcet is here: https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/10662