> My complaint isn't with the customer, its with MISRA being a poor tool and ripe for this kind of abuse. Any guideline/linter is ripe for abuse. I don't see M

> My complaint isn't with the customer, its with MISRA being a poor tool and ripe for this kind of abuse. Any guideline/linter is ripe for abuse. I don't see MISRA being an outlier in this regard. Had everything been developed in house, MISRA wouldn't have been the bottleneck. You'd ignore whatever MISRA rules are not relevant, and note the exception down formally, and be done with it. My job in that company was primarily to understand the automotive ISO guidelines, and inform the team about what was OK and what wasn't, and to write those rationales for the auditor(s). As an extreme example, for one component, the ISO standard allowed us to ignore almost all the guidelines because if it has been tested heavily, it suffices as evidence the component is safe. For that component, we felt it cheaper to test the heck out of it than to conform to the guidelines. We tested it by running it continuously for months, feeding in random inputs. Cheaper to have a computer do it than highly paid engineers getting bogged down. Even in a contracting scenario, this could have been avoided. You'd write your exceptions, and the customer would get an auditor to go over your exceptions, and be done with it. Don't blame guidelines for poor organizational behaviors. As I said elsewhere, the ISO guidelines allow you to be sane about it. Think of the plus side, though. If you had gone the route you wanted, you would have to read several hundred pages of an ISO standard multiple times before you could be well versed enough to know when it's OK to violate the guidelines. Reading those documents is a lot worse than following MISRA ;-)