Fix #14949: FP leakNoVarFunctionCall when passing resource to constructor

[aadanen]

Remove Variable and AllocType type checking when searching for unreleased arguments and when checking if member variables are deallocated in destructor.

This method is a little heavy handed and might hurt performance, but I am unsure how we could be more precise. It would be nice if we could check "If var.isResource() or var.needsToBeDeallocated()" but that would be a different PR i think.

[aadanen]

clang-tidy/build fails with
/home/runner/work/cppcheck/cppcheck/lib/checkmemoryleak.cpp:1049:13: error: do not use 'else' after 'continue' [readability-else-after-return,-warnings-as-errors]
1049 | else {
| ^
which will be easy to fix

sanitizers/build fails with a timeout. As I anticipated this solution is too slow. I will think about how to make it faster.

[chrchr-github]

sanitizers/build fails with a timeout. As I anticipated this solution is too slow. I will think about how to make it faster.

It does that all the time, I'll rerun it later...

[ludviggunne]

I don't think this has any affect in this case. This check only considers members that are allocated in the constructor.

[aadanen]

You are correct that it is irrelevant to this bug and I will revert the change. I made the change because I was a little confused and it is "wrong" for the same reason. Sorry!

I still think the change should be made because it makes the following enhancement:

struct S {
    explicit S(char *name) {
        m_fd = mkstemp(name); // file is not closed in destructor
    }
    int m_fd = -1;
};

S g(char *name) {
    return S(name);
}

void f(char* ptr) {
    S s = g(ptr);
}

(reports nothing) (requires --library=posix)

struct S {
    explicit S() {
        mem = malloc(42); // memory not freed in destructor
    }
    int *mem = NULL;
};

S g() {
    return S();
}

void f() {
    S s = g();
}

(reports unsafeClassError)

but that should be a separate bug and PR because its different and also it would be an "enhancement" instead of a "false positive". Should I make another forum post?