4 ms·
As I've been following posts on PVS Studio for a while, I'm sort of familiar with the kind of errors it finds. I was able to spot 13 of these errors -- althoug
by acidx 12y ago
As I've been following posts on PVS Studio for a while, I'm sort of familiar with the kind of errors it finds.
I was able to spot 13 of these errors -- although the page only counted that as 10 as it's very picky of which token constitutes the error.
PVS Studio (and CppCat) are great tools. I can't unfortunately use them as I don't write stuff for Windows.
- JIghtuse 12y agoTry to use CppCheck or LLVM's scan-build. They are pretty decent. I've been using them for a few weeks for now and I found quite a few errors and send patches to various open projects (Pidgin, util-linux, GHC).
- acidx 12y agoAh, yes, I'm familiar with these tools. They're indeed pretty good. In addition to them, I also use Coverity (they offer free licenses for open source projects) and Coccinelle (although it's a tool to refactor/create semantic patches, can be also used to find defects if you know what you're looking for -- useful if you fix one bug and you're wondering if there are more like it lurking). Having different opinions about your codebase is often good as the approach in finding defects is usually different between them. For instance, stuff by the PVS people seem pretty good to find copy/paste mistakes, which I've rarely found with other tools.