3 ms·
Every one of these points is just "use a static analyzer" and while I appreciate that I definetly don't appreciate them pushing Microsoft's static analysis tool
by gravypod 10y ago
Every one of these points is just "use a static analyzer" and while I appreciate that I definetly don't appreciate them pushing Microsoft's static analysis tooling rather then Free tooling.
I'd honestly welcome a post about different static analysis tooling that's libre and open source. Their pros and cons as well as how to deploy them would be good too.
- xkxx 10y agoThe author of this article is Andrey Karpov. He develops his own static analyzer called PVS-Studio. This article was originally published on his company's website: http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0391/ http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0391/. If anything, he is pushing his own (proprietary) static analyzer, not Microsoft's one.
- munin 10y agoA lot of the PVS-Studio analyses are described in enough detail that if someone wanted to, they could implement them as clang checkers. clang is definitely open source, I don't know about "libre" though.
- pjmlp 10y agoHow do those people dare to charge money and sell proprietary products! Also this is about PVS-Studio, nothing to do with Microsoft, they don't own the Studio word.
- gravypod 10y agoI have no problem with paying for a program with my money. I do have a problem paying for a program with my freedom.
- Strom 10y agoI'm sure Andrey would be willing to give you the source code, or even just straight out GPL/BSD license it to everyone if you paid enough. So you see, it still comes back to the problem that you aren't willing to pay what is requested.
- cjhanks 10y agoPVS is a product that performs a service. They have made major efforts to port this product to Linux; they have multiple articles scanning Linux FSF products and the Linux Kernel. People deserve to be paid for their work if it's useful.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]