[haiku-development] Re: object on the hype, using it as parameter and then use delete

  • From: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:45:08 +0200

On 2008-09-12 at 15:33:57 [+0200], Stefano Ceccherini 
<stefano.ceccherini@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2008/9/12 Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>:
> >
> > On 2008-09-12 at 14:48:49 [+0200], Stefano Ceccherini
> > <stefano.ceccherini@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> 2008/9/12 Michael Lotz <mmlr@xxxxxxxx>:
> >>
> >> > You make the same assumption that new cannot fail in r27448 which I 
> >> > find
> >> > a bad
> >> > idea. You could say that it is true that new cannot return NULL, since 
> >> > it
> >> > should actually throw an error and not return NULL. However this is 
> >> > not a
> >> > reason to strip the NULL checks, but to make new into new(std::nothrow)
> >> > which
> >> > actually returns NULL on a failed allocation (which can always 
> >> > happen). I
> >> > thought we had the general consensus that we use new(std::nothrow) and
> >> > always
> >> > check the result, but I'm not sure how the other see it.
> >>
> >> Yep I am for the nothrow + NULL check, too.
> >
> > +1
> >
> >> BTW I think that it should be clear that the Coverity reports aren't
> >> bulletproof: IOW: one should do a "manual" analysis before changing
> >> code based on the reports.
> >
> > Absolutely! I believe most of the kernel "defects" I have checked so far
> > refer to correct code. E.g. the "double deletion" checker seems to be
> > totally lost when analyzing code using reference counting. Maybe we should
> > collect and document these kinds of patterns somewhere.
> 
> Yes, I noticed that too.
> Coverity also can't know that there are some classes which autodeletes
> themselves on quit.
> For example, BAlert, BWindow, etc.
> Some other like BMediaTrack should not be deleted by the user either.
> 
> > If I understand it correctly, we can also have a mailing list where the
> > Coverity tool and its problems can be discussed and which is also read by
> > the Coverity people.
> 
> Interesting, so we should for example point out the things I just mentioned 
> ?

Yep, I guess that would be interesting for the Coverity people to improve 
their tool.

CU, Ingo

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku-development
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2008