qingstor/snips: specs/swagger_helpers.go; 3 LoC

Found a possible issue in [qingstor/snips](https://www.github.com/qingstor/snips) at [specs/swagger_helpers.go](https://github.com/qingstor/snips/blob/f4d85fda6d9bbaf02f252f9842fca411a9b16af0/specs/swagger_helpers.go#L373-L375)

Below is the message reported by the analyzer for this snippet of code. Beware that the analyzer only reports the first issue it finds, so please do not limit your consideration to the contents of the below message.

> function call at line 374 may store a reference to parameter

[Click here to see the code in its original context.](https://github.com/qingstor/snips/blob/f4d85fda6d9bbaf02f252f9842fca411a9b16af0/specs/swagger_helpers.go#L373-L375)

Click here to show the 3 line(s) of Go which triggered the analyzer.

```go
for _, parameter := range specOperation.Parameters {
s.parseParameters(operation, ¶meter, swagger)
}

```

Click here to show extra information the analyzer produced.

```
The following graphviz dot graph describes paths through the callgraph that could lead to a function which writes a pointer argument:
digraph G {
"(parseParameters, 3)" -> {"(parseParameter, 2)";}
"(parseParameter, 2)" -> {}
}

No path was found through the callgraph that could lead to a function which passes a pointer to third-party code.

```

Leave a reaction on this issue to contribute to the project by classifying this instance as a **Bug** :-1:, **Mitigated** :+1:, or **Desirable Behavior** :rocket:
See the descriptions of the classifications [here](https://github.com/github-vet/rangeclosure-findings#how-can-i-help) for more information.

commit ID: f4d85fda6d9bbaf02f252f9842fca411a9b16af0

Start in specs/swagger_helpers.go at lines 373-375 and inspect parseParameters and parseParameter, the functions named in the analyzer's call graph. Check how the range-loop parameter is passed, then determine whether the finding is a Bug, Mitigated, or Desirable Behavior and record the corresponding reaction.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.