On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Philipp Kloke <philipp.kloke@web.de> wrote:
?I am not sure if I am answering correctly (because I usually do not use mailing lists, I just selected the "Answer to all" button of my mail program), but I hope so. 

I now checked the code again, but with a newer version of cppcheck. The results are in the attachement.

If you would like to try to check the code by yourself, see https://sourceforge.net/projects/cppcheck/ (the tool is very easy to use)


I wonder - it seems that Subversion is covered by static-analysis from scan.coverity (http://scan.coverity.com/rungAll.html),
which is a powerful commercial analysis tool (not affiliated), but the cppcheck report posted here has stuff that are surely detected by coverity...
Are the dev's really using the reports from scan.coverity?