Possible bug in modules/highgui/src/window_gtk.cpp
Using an experimental new static analysis technique, we (GrammaTech) identified what appears to be a bug in cvImageWidget_get_preferred_height in modules/highgui/src/window_gtk.cpp:
#if defined (GTK_VERSION3)
static void
cvImageWidget_get_preferred_width (GtkWidget *widget, gint *minimal_width, gint *natural_width)
{
g_return_if_fail (widget != NULL);
g_return_if_fail (CV_IS_IMAGE_WIDGET (widget));
CvImageWidget * image_widget = CV_IMAGE_WIDGET( widget );
if(image_widget->original_image != NULL) {
*minimal_width = (image_widget->flags & CV_WINDOW_AUTOSIZE) != CV_WINDOW_AUTOSIZE ?
gdk_window_get_width(gtk_widget_get_window(widget)) : image_widget->original_image->cols;
}
else {
*minimal_width = 320;
}
if(image_widget->scaled_image != NULL) {
*natural_width = *minimal_width < image_widget->scaled_image->cols ?
image_widget->scaled_image->cols : *minimal_width;
}
else {
*natural_width = *minimal_width;
}
}
static void
cvImageWidget_get_preferred_height (GtkWidget *widget, gint *minimal_height, gint *natural_height)
{
g_return_if_fail (widget != NULL);
g_return_if_fail (CV_IS_IMAGE_WIDGET (widget));
CvImageWidget * image_widget = CV_IMAGE_WIDGET( widget );
if(image_widget->original_image != NULL) {
*minimal_height = (image_widget->flags & CV_WINDOW_AUTOSIZE) != CV_WINDOW_AUTOSIZE ?
gdk_window_get_height(gtk_widget_get_window(widget)) : image_widget->original_image->rows;
}
else {
*minimal_height = 240;
}
if(image_widget->scaled_image != NULL) {
*natural_height = *minimal_height < image_widget->scaled_image->rows ?
image_widget->scaled_image->cols : *minimal_height; // HERE! should "cols" be "rows"?
}
else {
*natural_height = *minimal_height;
}
}
#else
...
This "height" function appears to be a copy of the above "width" function with a systematic set of height/width-related changes applied, but it looks like the occurrence of "cols" on the line with the "HERE!" comment was missed. Can someone familiar with this code confrim/deny that this is a bug?
it seems copy/paste bug cc @mshabunin
Yes, looks like a bug. You can file an issue to our bug tracker or create a pull request with the fix.