Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> Well. Not dealt with yet. I think it's more or less clear how to
> tackle it using macros and builtins now but there's a lot of drudgery
> work to actually rewrite all the checks. I have the reports from Xi
> Wang's tool saved if anyone else wants to take it up. I would say it's
> on my TODO list but that's more of an abstract concept than an actual
> list.

[Removing all the other xposted lists -- don't do that!]

And fwiw the reason it's not an urgent issue for Postgres is because
we build with -fwrapv, essentially asking the compiler for a C
language that offers more guarantees than the standard (but matches
traditional C environments). So there isn't an active bug on Postgres
with GCC (or I think Clang) but may be with other compilers if they
don't have that option.

--
greg