Bug fix variable 'actual_iterations' set but not used (#1517) #3
Conversation
* Bug fix variable 'actual_iterations' set but not used
Compiling the project in clang 15 without -Wno-unused-but-set-variable flag the following error is generated:
benchmark-src/test/options_test.cc:70:10: error: variable 'actual_iterations' set but not used [-Werror,-Wunused-but-set-variable]
size_t actual_iterations = 0;
^
* Adjust according formatting of `clang-format`
Co-authored-by: dominic hamon <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK; seem fine. Though I reckon since we are 2 years old:
I wonder if we should just use the official repo. The only reason I have a commit had to do with CSMLTestRunner also linked with Benchmark. Now that is no longer the case I reckon we could use the official repo again.
But oh well; I am OK with these changes 👍 😃
It definitely needs to be updated soon. I just didn't have time to deal with any fallout of that today. Thanks for the review! |
| @@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ void BM_explicit_iteration_count(benchmark::State& state) { | |||
|
|
|||
| // Test that the requested iteration count is respected. | |||
| assert(state.max_iterations == 42); | |||
| size_t actual_iterations = 0; | |||
| for (auto _ : state) ++actual_iterations; | |||
| for (auto _ : state) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this loop is not doing anything, is it? Is this something we want in the future? If so using a maybe_unused instead of deleting the variable maybe the way to go. Or get rid of this code entirely, given that it is not doing anything.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree, that's how they should have fixed it, and it's how I fixed it locally when I first encountered this. I am picking the upstream commit intentionally instead of doing that, though, so that when we update the fork, we won't have a conflict.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am under the assumption that the variable named underscore (_) is iterating over the state collection. Yes the body of the for-loop is empty and thus you may believe it isn't doing anything. But just looping is doing something. Like it is probably something like:
auto it = state.begin();
while( it != state.end() ) it++;So I do believe it wouldn't make sense to get rid of the for-loop completely as it might actually be doing something.
Hope that helps some 😃
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but unless there is some really weird behavior attached to the operator++ then that loop does not do anything. Maybe the State copy constructor does something really weird as well. Otherwise we are just assigning each element of state to a temporary. Weird code.
Description
Pick bug fix from upstream repo for the this error we keep getting when compiling all of CommonCpp on Mac.
Upstream commit: google@62edc4f
Error
Original description from upstream commit