Re: clang's static checker report.

From: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>
To: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: clang's static checker report.
Date: 2009-08-27 12:39:46
Message-ID: DAA43615-E02A-42A0-8A75-0363C0069A42@pointblue.com.pl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

heh, sorry folks for the noise again :/

There was a fair amount of false positives there - due to nature of
Assert() macro. Mainly, since assert_enabled is a runtime variable,
not a macro (which I sadly overlooked).

So, hardcoding it to (1) (using CPP) removed quite few false positives.

New results at:

http://zlew.org/postgresql_static_check/scan-build-2009-08-27-4/
archive at: http://zlew.org/postgresql_static_check/postgresql_static_check_27thAugust2009_2.tar.xz

Please tell me, if you think that it can be improved more.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-08-27 13:58:42 Re: 8.5 release timetable, again
Previous Message Grzegorz Jaskiewicz 2009-08-27 12:08:33 Re: Patches for static check on geo_ops.c