Last time I checked there wasn't high impact defects. Mind pointing out the defects you think should be fixed ?
Thanks On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:35 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Yeah, it's not going to help with Scala, but it can at least find > stuff in the Java code. I'm not suggesting anyone run it regularly, > but one run to catch some bugs is useful. > > I've already triaged ~70 issues there just in the Java code, of which > a handful are important. > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Since majority of code is written in Scala which is not analyzed by > Coverity, the efficacy of the tool seems limited. > > > >> On Mar 4, 2016, at 2:34 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> > >> > https://scan.coverity.com/projects/apache-spark-2f9d080d-401d-47bc-9dd1-7956c411fbb4?tab=overview > >> > >> This has to be run manually, and is Java-only, but the inspection > >> results are pretty good. Anyone should be able to browse them, and let > >> me know if anyone would like more access. > >> Most are false-positives, but it's found some reasonable little bugs. > >> > >> When my stack of things to do clears I'll try to address them, but I > >> bring it up as an FYI for anyone interested in static analysis. > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org > >> >
