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

From: Tom Browder <tom(dot)browder(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)
Date: 2016-03-05 14:35:54
Message-ID: CAFMGiz_o6AbFF-Mo_8q1AvgQHFyh+Q3XZB9ydUuzsN76FcsoEg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> 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!]

Okay, sorry. I thought since the reply was pg-specific it would cut down noise.

-Tom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2016-03-05 14:40:40 Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2016-03-05 14:34:28 Re: VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc