Re: Cppcheck reports patch for 2546

[Julien Nabet]

On 19/05/2012 00:36, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> Thanks for the file, Julien.  I have split the warnings into various
> issues.
>
> See issues 2545, 2546, and 2548 through 2554 on the issue tracker.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2545&colspec=ID%20Type%2
> 0Status%20Stars%20Owner%20Patch%20Needs%20Summary
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2546&colspec=ID%20Type%2
> 0Status%20Stars%20Owner%20Patch%20Needs%20Summary
>
> etc.
>
> Julien, if you want to fix any of these, I'd be happy to help you get
> patches reviewed and pushed.
>
> Here's instructions on uploading a patch for review:
>
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/commits-and-patches
> #uploading-a-patch-for-review
Since I don't have a Google account to sign in to 
http://codereview.appspot.com/, I attached the patch for 2546.
Don't hesitate to tell me if it's ok or not. (I attached a link to why 
prefix is better).

Julien.

PS : about why it's better to use != instead of < for end iterator 
comparison, see http://forums.codeguru.com/archive/index.php/t-428940.html
Sorry, I would have preferred a more "official" link

0001-Fix-2546-Prefix-incrementers-may-be-preferred-for-no.patch
Description: Text Data