24 ms·

just because the ui is more user-friendly? Those better warnings aren't just due to a simple UI patch ... clang is doing better and deeper static analysis than

just because the ui is more user-friendly? Those better warnings aren't just due to a simple UI patch ... clang is doing better and deeper static analysis than gcc in order to even be able to produce those more intelligent warnings.

ahn 17y ago
gcc with the dehydra plugin is doing better and deeper static analysis than clang.
- Zev 17y ago
  Doesn't dehydra do static analysis for C++ code? In which case, of course it would do better then clang; clang doesn't even claim to have complete c++ support yet.
ssp 17y ago
There is nothing deep about these warnings. It would likely be really, really simple to add them to gcc.
- orborde 17y ago
  And yet, gcc doesn't have them.
  - ssp 17y ago
    If you think these warnings are evidence that "clang is doing better and deeper static analysis than gcc", then you have no idea how compilers work.