4 ms·
I'm not familiar with Infer or Zoncolan, but I wonder what percentage of issues these tools detect is already covered by IntelliJ IDEA "inspections". Inspectio
by mckinney 7y ago
I'm not familiar with Infer or Zoncolan, but I wonder what percentage of issues these tools detect is already covered by IntelliJ IDEA "inspections". Inspections consist of a configurable series of static analyzers each targeting a specific case. IJ runs inspections concurrently in the editor, flagging problems as they occur. What's more, many inspections provide "quick fixes" -- they can fix the issue at hand for you with a simple keystroke. Inspections can also run in batch and can bulk-apply quick fixes.
The obvious advantage inspections have over diff-time tooling is that detectable issues are often fixed immediately when a developer is most familiar with the code in context (edit-time), which translates to improved productivity. Additionally since most inspections provide quick fixes, they not only save time, but also provide code consistency regarding how issues are resolved.
I realize FB uses languages other than Java, so I wonder if their static analysis investments would be better served focused more on building/buying better IDE tooling?
- Areading314 7y agoI highly doubt FB is trying to save money on their IDE budget. Zoncolan and Infer can detect many more bugs and security issues outside the capabilities of the IDE. Also, even if one dev is using Intellij, the global configuration of the system in the article can enforce consistent standards across the organization.
- mckinney 7y agoYou misunderstand. It's not about the cost of the IDE but rather the cost of maintaining software and preventing defects over time. The takeaway from my comment: Toward a general policy if static analysis were built into the editor, as it is with IntelliJ, it would significantly improve productivity and guarantee a higher rate of defect prevention.