Whole Tomato Software Forums
Whole Tomato Software Forums
Main Site | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 Visual Assist
 Technical Support
 Bad suggestion on default constructor

You must be registered to post a reply.
Click here to register.

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Format: BoldItalicizeUnderlineStrikethrough Align leftCenterAlign right Insert horizontal ruleUpload and insert imageInsert hyperlinkInsert email addressInsert codeInsert quoted textInsert listInsert Emoji
   
Message:

Forum code is on.
Html is off.

 
Check to subscribe to this topic.
   

T O P I C    R E V I E W
DaveSwedensky Posted - Sep 13 2017 : 04:32:51 AM
I've found what looks like a bug in the "VA Code Inspection" suggestions, but would be happy to be proved wrong :)

Unfortunately I can't seem to find a good minimal example of my problem - I think it only arises in complexity. But it goes roughly like this:

struct A
{
    A(Arg1 arg1, Arg2 arg2) {}
};

struct B : public A
{
    B() : A(thing1, thing2) {}
};

All well and good. But if for some reason the inspector thinks the call to A's constructor is wrong, for example:

B() : A(thing1) {}

then the "Code Inspection" window will tell me that the "Default constructor body can be replaced with '= default'", and the fix becomes:

B() : A(thing1) = default;

which doesn't compile. Ok, for this example it wouldn't compile because we've got a bad constructor for A.

In my Real Life example, the constructor for A has a more complex form and the constructor for B does compile properly but for some reason the code inspector has the same problem so it suggests I change to:

B() : A(...args...) = default;

which is definitely wrong.

Apologies for not being able to give a self-contained example of this - I tried but when I simplified as soon as the parser understood the constructor line the problem went away.

There doesn't seem to be any way to tell the code inspector that a particular instance that it thinks is wrong can't be changed for some (hopefully good) reason. Some IDEs do this by allowing a special comment on the line before and allow this to be added instead of applying the quick fix - could such a feature be incorporated for VisualAssist?

Thanks,
-Dave
5   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
sean Posted - Nov 07 2019 : 5:45:28 PM
case=111068 is implemented in build 2353
https://support.wholetomato.com/default.asp?W404#2353

Starting in 2353, directives in source comments can prevent issues from being flagged in particular instances without disabling a Code Inspection checker globally.

Directives that are processed before parsing:
// vaCI:skipall		skip Code Inspection entirely

Directives that are processed after parsing:
// vaCI:skip		skip fix(es) from the current line
// vaCI:skip+10		skip 10 lines, starting with current line
// vaCI:skip-10		skip 10 previous lines, starting with current line
// vaCI:skip+*		skip until the end
// vaCI:skip-*		skip from the beginning
// vaCI:<any skip>:checker,checker,...	
// 				skip only specified checker(s); 
// 				checker names are matched by given substring;
//				code issue names/descriptions are not matched;


An example that skips all modernize-make-unique and modernize-make-shared issues:

// vaCI:skipall:unique,shared
accord Posted - Sep 26 2017 : 08:57:59 AM
You can also subscribe to this topic at the top of this page.
feline Posted - Sep 19 2017 : 09:09:34 AM
When we have a new release that fixes either of these cases, this thread will be updated.

The easiest method may simply be to turn On:

VA Options -> Startup -> Automatically check for new version

and review the release notes to see what has been fixed. You can also always ask here for an update on this.
DaveSwedensky Posted - Sep 14 2017 : 03:44:25 AM
Yes, it has an initializer list so is likely covered by the same bug. Interestingly I found some examples of use of initializer lists where the bug does not manifest. So long as the issue is logged, I'm happy. Also, thanks for the feature request. I think it will be useful for many people.

Apologies for a very basic question, but how do I subscribe to updates for these issues?
accord Posted - Sep 13 2017 : 3:00:36 PM
We have a bug report for Code Inspections to not suggest constructor with initialiser list be replaced with = default

case=109725

Is it possible that your "real" world example has an initializer list?

Regarding a special comment to disable code inspections: I have put in a feature request for that.

case=111068

© 2021 Whole Tomato Software, LLC Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000