Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Apr 2013 12:23 UTC
ReactOS "The ReactOS project is rapidly developing. One of the developers participating in this project suggested that we re-analyzed the source code, as the code base is growing fast. We were glad to do that. We like this project, and we'll be happy if this article helps the developers to eliminate some bugs. Analysis was performed with the PVS-Studio 5.02 code analyzer."
Thread beginning with comment 557349
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Advert?
by Valhalla on Tue 2nd Apr 2013 17:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Advert?"
Member since:

Yep, apart from possibly having to wade through 'false positives' there's really no downside to running your codebase through a static analyzer.

I know Haiku has used Coverity and as I recall so had ReactOS before this aswell.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Advert?
by moondevil on Tue 2nd Apr 2013 20:37 in reply to "RE[3]: Advert?"
moondevil Member since:

I usually advocate to always enable warnings as errors and use a syntactic analyzer in the continuous build server, specially in languages where it is so easy to write insecure code.

Locally a developer can do whatever s/he wants, but into source control, only sane content gets in.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Advert?
by bert64 on Wed 3rd Apr 2013 18:14 in reply to "RE[4]: Advert?"
bert64 Member since:

A number of open source packages ship with warnings-as-errors enabled by default in the build process... This can be EXTREMELY annoying, especially when it isn't easy to turn off...
Warnings can occur due to newer compilers, architecture/os differences etc, and in many cases warnings don't stop the program working. Sure in an ideal world code would all compile without any warnings on any platform, but in reality many warnings are false positives and noone writes perfect code.

Reply Parent Score: 2