From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
Cc: | Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: sparse (static analyzer) report |
Date: | 2005-01-15 02:30:37 |
Message-ID: | 41E8804D.2060504@samurai.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
BTW, perhaps one reason for the relatively small number of legitimate
issues picked up by sparse is that I ran sparse on the tree a month or
two ago and fixed some of the stylistic issues it reported. Most of the
stuff I didn't bother to fix looked like either a sparse bug, or a
marginal style improvement I didn't bother applying (like fixing 0 =>
NULL in dllist.c).
I've been meaning to investigate whether sparse can be used as something
more than just a fussy syntax checker (i.e. whether it can do any
meaningful static analysis for interesting properties), but I haven't
had a chance yet.
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It's complaining in several places about function as variables in
> function declarations (the multiple walkers and mutators for example);
> not sure how correct that is.
I believe the conclusion of prior discussions about making the
walker/mutator prototypes more precise is that it's not worth the cost.
-Neil
P.S. Hope everyone had a good holiday. I'm back at work on Monday.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Wong | 2005-01-15 03:09:42 | Re: sparse (static analyzer) report |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-01-15 02:24:12 | Re: IBM releases 500 patents |