On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 13:34:49 +0100, Robert Shearman wrote:
Sorry, you are correct. It does indeed look like a flaw in the scanner:
I'm not sure whether this is a bug in the scanner or some other issue, but cases where it flags things that cannot happen because of the design of other parts of the code is what I meant by "logical" errors, rather than actual boolean logic. I'm not really convinced a static analysis can catch things that we "know" cannot happen (eg it'd be a violation of the X protocol or something) and so rely on them without explicit checks.
thanks -mike