enabled and fixed cppcheck performance checks

[firewave]

No description provided.

[firewave]

Looks like this needs an ulalaca update first as most of the code appears to no longer exist.

[firewave]

ulalaca/UnixSocket.hpp:69:43: performance: Function parameter 'path' should be passed by const reference. [passedByValue]
    explicit UnixSocket(const std::string path);
                                          ^

This is a false positive and I filed https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/14520 about it.

This is also reported correctly on the implementation:

ulalaca/UnixSocket.cpp:44:42: performance: Function parameter 'path' should be passed by const reference. [passedByValue]
UnixSocket::UnixSocket(const std::string path):
                                         ^

[matt335672]

Thanks @firewave

I'll look at getting Ulalaca compiling with the latest devel of xrdp, and then I can try to address these.

[matt335672]

See team-unstablers/ulalaca-xrdp#20

Running the performance checks against the latest Ulalaca produces quite a few more errors:

performance.log.txt

[firewave]

Running the performance checks against the latest Ulalaca produces quite a few more errors:

And most of them look rather serious and are not really performance related. They should be addressed before updating it downstream. But you can ignore useStlAlgorithm as those might not always result in the best code.

I will take a look at the syntaxError.

[firewave]

The upstream repo seems abandoned. Looks like you need to use your own fork going forward.

[matt335672]

@metalefty, @unstabler : Can you comment on the state of the Ulalaca module?

[unstabler]

Hi everyone, it's been a while since my last update here.

Development on Ulalaca has been stalled for some time due to a few technical hurdles. Recently, I have been prioritizing my efforts on a separate QUIC-based project derived from this work.

Once this new project reaches a stable trajectory, my plan is to backport the core features to make Ulalaca fully usable again. However, realistically, this will not happen in the immediate future.

Because of this, I realize the current Ulalaca codebase might just be an obstacle or a maintenance burden for the repository right now. Please feel free to remove it from the source tree. I sincerely apologize to the contributors for any inconvenience caused by my lack of maintenance.

If and when I successfully complete the backports, I will return with a much more stable, high-quality, and maintainable codebase.

Thank you for your understanding and hard work.

[matt335672]

Thanks for the swift reply @unstabler. We'll be happy to help with the integration, when the time comes.

[matt335672]

@metalety - are you happy to remove Ulalaca for now?