This one is probably easily catchable even by a static code analysis, though.
I suspect this is the result of th->has_object being added later than the surrounding code. I don't think someone would write this code on the first attempt with this bug. It's too obvious.
If the code repo ever becomes available, I'll check my theory out. :D
I suspect this is the result of th->has_object being added later than the surrounding code. I don't think someone would write this code on the first attempt with this bug. It's too obvious.
If the code repo ever becomes available, I'll check my theory out. :D