Re: clang's static checker report.

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>
Cc: 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: 2009-08-23 23:15:43
Message-ID: 407d949e0908231615g5d929d42k83abc4f9ffeb5625@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Grzegorz
Jaskiewicz<gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl> wrote:
> ok folks, here's the last one for Today:
>
> http://zlew.org/postgresql_static_check/scan-build-2009-08-23-29/

This does look better. The first one I looked at looks like a
legitimate bug. The nice thing is that this seems to be picking up a
lot of error handling cases that we don't bother to have regression
tests for.

One more request though. Can you configure with --enable-assertions so
that it doesn't pick up failures where we have already documented that
the case it's claiming can happen can't happen. Those could possibly
be bugs but they're more likely to be cases where we know that a given
data structure's rep invariant prohibits the combination of states
that it's assuming.

--
greg
http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Grzegorz Jaskiewicz 2009-08-23 23:42:55 Re: clang's static checker report.
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-08-23 22:33:49 Re: Unicode UTF-8 table formatting for psql text output