apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Statical analysis apache 2.3.11
Date Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:23:11 GMT
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 3:47 PM, John Smith <lbalbalba@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com> wrote:
>> (adding dev@apr, since some of the report covers apr code)
>>
>>
>> There are some harmless bugs, some bugs which are truly useful to fix
>> beyond "cleanness", and false positives.  I can't tell you how many of
>> each ;)
>>
>> I'm sure some of the items will be fixed just because you posted this
>> (thanks).  Feel free to submit patches yourself.  Many of the
>> individual reports are tedius to research, only to find that the code
>> is correct :(
>>
>> FWLIW, some of us went through one of these reports last year and
>> cleaned up a bunch of issues that generated clang warnings.
>>
>
> I honestly didnt realize that clang has been used to analyze Apache
> not too long ago; in the future I guess I should do better research
> before posting stuff.

that wasn't really my point; I'm sure that your posting will prompt
some new fixes (i.e., "good for you")

>
> Im sorry to hear that there were quite a few false positives. Please
> note that the devs of clang are very interested in reducing the amount
> of false positives that it finds. So if someone does find a false
> positive, perhaps it would be nice to report it :
>
> http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/filing_bugs.html
>
> Of course, that requires serious effort, which people may simply be
> unable to offer.

Mime
View raw message