Re: Couple pointers

On 07/03/2012 11:11 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 4/07/2012 6:04 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote:
>> On 07/02/2012 05:42 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>
>>> ... is anyone able to come up with a script or tester to detect
>>> classes
>>> which violate our Big-3 constructor/destructor/assignment operator
>>> guideline? I know there are portions of the code which are broken today
>>> and it is easily overlooked, this would be a nice one to enforce
>>> automatically.
>> Hi Amos,
>>
>> Yes, Measurement Factory has purchased a Coverity static analysis
>> license to automatically detect bugs like the ones you describe. I have
>> run one Squid test during evaluation, and the tool did detect missing
>> constructor/destructor/assignment operators (among hundreds of other
>> bugs and non-bugs).
>>
>> We are waiting for Factory sysadmin to set the tool up and for Squid
>> Project sysadmin to setup [automated] Squid tests the results of which
>> can then be somehow shared with Squid developers (we did get Coverity
>> permission to do that). I hope this will be done in July.

> Sweet. I wondered what happend with Coverity. We had an FOSS account
> there years ago but after the ring level changes they stopped contacting
> us and even scanning recent sources, kept scanning daily but only on old
> sources.

Last time I asked, somebody (either you or Henrik IIRC) told me that
trying to work with their free scan project was hopeless. Having control
over the tool will give us a lot more flexibility, of course. It remains
to be seen whether the bugs found by these scans will justify the
expense, but we need to get the tool installed and running first.

Cheers,

Alex.
Received on Wed Jul 04 2012 - 23:30:01 MDT