Re: Small miscellaneus fixes (Part II) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ranier Vilela
Subject Re: Small miscellaneus fixes (Part II)
Date
Msg-id CAEudQAq_1BfRhq6H6DHR_KAxYcnFjXKuWVuL7cDaBPKPtEf+4g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Small miscellaneus fixes (Part II)  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Responses Re: Small miscellaneus fixes (Part II)  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Em ter., 20 de dez. de 2022 às 21:51, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> escreveu:
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 06:27:04PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> 5. Use boolean operator with boolean operands
> (b/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c)

tablecmds.c: right.  Since 074c5cfbf

pg_dump.c: right.  Since b08dee24a

> 4. Fix dead code (src/backend/utils/adt/formatting.c)
> Np->sign == '+', is different than "!= '-'" and is different than "!= '+'"
> So the else is never hit.

formatting.c: I don't see the problem.

        if (Np->sign != '-')
        ...
        else if (Np->sign != '+' && IS_PLUS(Np->Num))
        ...

You said that the "else" is never hit, but why ?
This is a Coverity report.

dead_error_condition: The condition Np->Num->flag & 0x200 cannot be true.
5671                        else if (Np->sign != '+' && IS_PLUS(Np->Num))
    
CID 1501076 (#1 of 1): Logically dead code (DEADCODE)dead_error_line: Execution cannot reach this statement: Np->Num->flag &= 0xffffffff....

So, the dead code is because IS_PUS(Np->Num) is already tested and cannot be true on else.

v1 patch attached.

regards,
Ranier Vilela
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump
Next
From: Eric Radman
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add function to_oct