https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=369546
--- Comment #4 from Peter Ped Helcmanovsky <p...@7gods.org> --- (In reply to RJVB from comment #3) > Seems you're on to something. Have you tried replacing the INT_MAX token by > a numeric value to see if the symbolic default argument has something to do > with the issue? `void BinIncFile(char* fname, int offset = INT_MAX, int length = 12);` -> shows -> `void BinIncFile(char* fname, int offset, int length = 12)` `void BinIncFile(char* fname, int offset = INT_MAX, int length = INT_MAX);` -> shows -> `void BinIncFile(char* fname, int offset, int length);` `void BinIncFile(char* fname = NULL, int offset = 1, int length = 0);` -> `void BinIncFile(char* fname, int offset = 1, int length = 0);` `void BinIncFile(char* fname = nullptr, int offset = 0, int length = INT_MAX);` -> `void BinIncFile(char* fname, int offset = nullptr, int length = 0);` So it seems it's not trivial +1 index, but the default values are assigned from back to front (not hard link to particular argument), and if some "didn't parse", it's missing in the assignment, creating effect of +1,2,... index bug depending how many are missing. `nullptr` is understood and shown. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
