Fix #1074, Refactor CFE_TIME_RegisterSynchCallback#1075
Merged
astrogeco merged 1 commit intonasa:integration-candidatefrom Jan 25, 2021
Merged
Fix #1074, Refactor CFE_TIME_RegisterSynchCallback#1075astrogeco merged 1 commit intonasa:integration-candidatefrom
astrogeco merged 1 commit intonasa:integration-candidatefrom
Conversation
- One return point - Eliminates "possible uninitialized variable" static analysis warning
Contributor
|
CCB:2021-01-13 APPROVED Replaces multiple returns with an "if tree" fixes some static code analysis complaints. |
astrogeco
added a commit
to nasa/cFS
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 25, 2021
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Describe the contribution
Fix #1074
Testing performed
Standard build, unit test
Expected behavior changes
None except eliminates static analysis warning
System(s) tested on
Additional context
Partially just a conversation starter - do we want to avoid (invalid) warnings w/ similar refactors? Alternatively we could just ignore/repress the warnings.
Third party code
None
Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Jacob Hageman - NASA/GSFC