Skip to content

Conversation

@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@firewave firewave changed the title fixed # - suppressions with line number not reported as unmatched fixed #14331 - suppressions with line number not reported as unmatched Dec 15, 2025
@firewave firewave force-pushed the unmatch-line branch 2 times, most recently from ae7c0c4 to 653e0e6 Compare December 15, 2025 12:03
@firewave firewave marked this pull request as ready for review December 15, 2025 12:03
@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The cfg test failures are caused by missing configurations.

@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The Python test is passing locally for me - needs more looking into.

@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The cfg test failures are caused by missing configurations.

See at least https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/1059#comment:11 among possibly other tickets.

@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The Python test is passing locally for me - needs more looking into.

Ah, they fail only with -j2.

@firewave firewave marked this pull request as draft December 15, 2025 12:45
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator Author

firewave commented Dec 15, 2025

The cfg test failures are caused by missing configurations.

See at least https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/1059#comment:11 among possibly other tickets.

Actually this is related to __cplusplus already being defined (always). When macros are flagged as built-in (see danmar/simplecpp#547) we might be able to add some handling for this.

I filed https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/14333 about it.

@firewave
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This needs more looking into regarding inline suppressions in inactive code.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant