[Bf-committers] PVS-Studio Static Analysis

[Jason Wilkins]

I thought that he had his own tool viva64 that PVS-Studio was based
on.  I do not really want to argue politics, but I have no problem
with the fact that he has added value by integrating it with VS and
then released it without source.  He honestly may not have even
modified clang that much and is just using it as a library.  The clang
license was specifically chosen so that people could do this kind of
thing.  I really like the BSD style license :-)

I also do not think you can get "locked in" to a tool like this.  It
checks your source for possible errors.  If it stops working then you
shrug your shoulders and move on.

Microsoft will be releasing a checking tool as part of the next Visual
Studio (even the Express version) and I look forward to having more
tools to satisfy my nit-picking fetish :-)

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Lockal S <lockalsash at gmail.com> wrote:
> I should mention that PVS-Studio contains clang for C++ parsing and
> preprocessing. As far I can see they have reimplemented some of the
> clang features (missing in vc++) and have added their own diagnosis
> patterns. The main feature is visual studio integration, which allows
> to enable/disable diagnosis options and mark false positives right
> inside visual studio using GUI. The drawback is impossibility of using
> it even with VC++ Express Edition (this version does not support
> extension packages) and of course with non-windows systems. The price
> of EURO 3500/year also worries me. Be sure not to lock in to a proprietary
> vendor when the license expires.
>
> so basically Andrey Karpov is selling better version of Clang (at
> least better than native vc++ compiler analyser). But remember 3DMagix
> and IllusionMage? Of course PVS-Studio is NOT a such scam, but only
> because Clang is under BSD license and not GPL. The problem is
> PVS-Studio have never returned a single line of code back to the Clang
> SVN. As for me I do not support such kind of business.
>
> 25 апреля 2012 г. 9:44 пользователь Campbell Barton
> <ideasman42 at gmail.com> написал:
>> for obvious things they mostly find the same issues (even same false
>> positives), but each have a handful that are unique.
>> I've ran blender through cppcheck, splint, sparse and clang-static-checler.
>>
>> the problem is that once you wade through the error logs (mainly false
>> positives), and fixed the actual bugs...
>> Running a second time gives you only the false positives again.
>> If some new bug is added to the source you still needed to read over
>> the false positives (unless your memory is really good).
>>
>> long term we need to have a way to notify us when new errors are added.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Nicholas Bishop
>> <nicholasbishop at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Not necessarily; different static analyzers can detect different types
>>> of potential problems. The PVS analysis contains some interesting
>>> things like the "Misprint in a homogeneous code block" section that I
>>> don't think clang's analyzer does.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Tom M <letterrip at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> We have a page with generated CLang static analysis,
>>>>
>>>> http://clang.blenderheads.org/trunk/
>>>>
>>>> It probably shows the same bugs as PVS-Studio does.
>>>>
>>>> LetterRip
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Nicholas Bishop
>>>> <nicholasbishop at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I think some of these have been fixed already in recent commits from Campbell.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Jason Wilkins
>>>>> <jason.a.wilkins at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0145/#ID0EO3BK
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It appears that Andrey Karpov has done an analysis of Blender source
>>>>>> code using his PVS-Studio tool.  He did this just yesterday, so I
>>>>>> assume the problems he found are still in the source.  He offers free
>>>>>> licenses to open source project members (3500 euro software otherwise,
>>>>>> wow).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was thinking of investigating the problems he found and seeing if I
>>>>>> could fix them.
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Campbell
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers