>>> "id": "SAF-2-safe",
>>> + "analyser": {
>>> + "eclair": "MC3R1.R9.1"
>>> + },
>>> + "name": "Rule 9.1: initializer not needed",
>>> + "text": "The following local variables are possibly subject to
>>> being read before being written, but code inspection ensured that the
>>> control flow in the construct where they appear ensures that no such event
>>> may happen."
>>> + },
>>> + {
>>> + "id": "SAF-3-safe",
>>> + "analyser": {
>>> + "eclair": "MC3R1.R9.1"
>>> + },
>>> + "name": "Rule 9.1: initializer not needed",
>>> + "text": "The following local variables are possibly subject to
>>> being read before being written, but code inspection ensured that the
>>> control flow in the construct where they appear ensures that no such event
>>> may happen."
>>> + },
>>
>> Since the rule and the justification are the same, you can declare only once
>> and use the same tag on top of the offending lines, so /* SAF-2-safe
>> MC3R1.R9.1 */,
>> also, I remember some maintainers not happy about the misra rule being put
>> after the tag, now I don’t recall who
>
> Sorry, I see there was in a patch before a SAF-1-safe with the same
> justification, so I suggest you use SAF-3-safe as tag and drop the new
> justifications introduced here
I meant “use SAF-1-safe”, sorry, I should do less multitasking
