reviewing-cpp

Review Context

• Changed files: !git diff --name-only HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "No recent commits"
• Staged files: !git diff --staged --name-only

C++ Desktop Code Review

Scope: $ARGUMENTS

Delivers focused, streamlined C++ desktop code reviews matching stated task requirements exactly. No over-analysis.

Workflow

1. Read task requirements to understand expected scope
2. Detect framework (wxWidgets / GTK3 / Qt) from includes and CMakeLists.txt
3. Match review depth to task complexity (single file vs multi-module)
4. Validate requirements — does implementation match task scope exactly?
5. Issue focused feedback with specific file paths and line numbers

Review Strategy

Simple Tasks (single file/widget): Memory safety, framework correctness, requirements match

Complex Tasks (multi-module): Above plus architecture, ownership graph, event flow, thread safety

Always: Check CMakeLists.txt, check for raw pointer leaks

Review Checklist

Memory Safety:

• No raw new without matching delete (prefer smart pointers)
• No dangling pointers to destroyed widgets
• RAII used for all resource acquisition (files, sockets, handles)
• No reinterpret_cast without safety justification
• Container access bounds-checked where needed (at() vs [])

Framework Anti-Patterns:

• wxWidgets: no manual delete of child windows (parent owns them)
• GTK3: all g_object_unref / g_free calls present
• Qt: no delete on QObject children (parent-child ownership)
• No blocking calls in GUI event loop (use async/worker threads)
• Event handlers do not throw exceptions across framework boundaries

Build System (CMakeLists.txt):

• Target-based commands (no include_directories(), link_libraries())
• find_package() with imported targets, not raw variables
• Minimum CMake version specified
• No hardcoded paths or platform assumptions without conditionals

Thread Safety: