Jacek Caban wrote:
dlls/urlmon/tests/misc.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi Jacek,
The addition of these new tests led to a Coverity warning (#947) as your using str2 in your tests. str2 is checked for NULL earlier on but only skips a few tests now if it's indeed NULL.
The question is, should we just add a return after the skip() or get rid of the whole checking for NULL.
(The str2 checking was not added by you btw).
Hi Paul,
Paul Vriens wrote:
Jacek Caban wrote:
dlls/urlmon/tests/misc.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi Jacek,
The addition of these new tests led to a Coverity warning (#947) as your using str2 in your tests. str2 is checked for NULL earlier on but only skips a few tests now if it's indeed NULL.
The question is, should we just add a return after the skip() or get rid of the whole checking for NULL.
Checking memory allocation in tests doesn't make sense IMO. I think existing checking for NULL should be removed.
Thanks, Jacek