7 messages in ru.sysoev.nginxRe: Clang scan-build output| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Akins, Brian | Nov 4, 2009 2:58 pm | |
| Cliff Wells | Nov 4, 2009 4:51 pm | |
| 张立冰 | Nov 4, 2009 5:27 pm | |
| Maxim Dounin | Nov 4, 2009 6:08 pm | |
| Maxim Dounin | Nov 4, 2009 6:12 pm | |
| Adrian Perez de Castro | Nov 5, 2009 2:41 am | |
| Akins, Brian | Nov 5, 2009 10:40 am |
| Subject: | Re: Clang scan-build output | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Adrian Perez de Castro (the....@gmail.com) | |
| Date: | Nov 5, 2009 2:41:16 am | |
| List: | ru.sysoev.nginx | |
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:51:50 -0800, Cliff wrote:
That's a pretty cool tool. Surprising though that some really simplistic stuff generated false positives, e.g.:
Clang is going to be a great thing. I am already using the compiler in a daily basis for building plain-C stuff (e.g. Nginx itself), and both the compilation speed and the generated code are speedy. There are even some cases where Clang generates slightly better object code than GCC, see: http://hdante.blogspot.com/2009/05/benchmark-where-clang-wins-gcc.html
The static analyzer is a nice bonus, but as you mention, it produces some false positives -- but I prefer a picky tool that prodces some false positives than a loose one that misses some potential bugs. After all, it is up to the programmer, who really knows the intention of the code, to decide which warnings are real bugs :)
Br.
-- Adrian Perez de Castro