| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Caveat: GCC-based analysis unreliable for Free SoftwareCaveat: GCC-based analysis unreliable for Free SoftwarePosted Jan 26, 2010 14:14 UTC (Tue) by pjm (subscriber, #2080)In reply to: Caveat: GCC-based analysis unreliable for Free Software by marcH Parent article: LCA: Static analysis with GCC plugins
> But I do not think you can seriously escape from working out all the possible [behaviours of unspecified constructs], can you?
We should clarify that one needn't explicitly enumerate the possible behaviours, but yes, the fact that there are many valid behaviours for a given set of .c/.cc files is ultimately why analysis using gcc plugins doesn't in general give reliable results for Free Software (in the sense more precisely described in my initial post).
(Log in to post comments)
Caveat: GCC-based analysis unreliable for Free Software Posted Jan 26, 2010 21:22 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
A static analyser should be able to warn just fine about multiple stores to
objects in the same sequence point (aliases excepted). Such code is inherently buggy.
|
|
||||||||||||