> -Wall is the minimum that should be applied to source code. Running
> it through Splint (or some other verification tool) would not hurt
> either.
That's true. Nonetheless some people are too lazy to make
a distclean first ;-). Splint is toooo buggy to use it.
At work we use pclint from gimple with strong type
checking and MISRA checking. But also pclint have
it's limitations, if it came to template specialization
and references.
I'm working in the automotive world and have seen
only some fragments of OpenOcd, but there is
defently room for improvements I would expect
that pclint would throw a hole bunch of warnings.
What I dislike most:
Missing brackets:
if (FOO_BAR)
do_something
It should be
if (FOO_BAR)
{
do:something
}
because if do_something is defined like follows:
#define do_something a=10; b = 20;
Then the resulting code is really:
if (FOO_BAR)
{
a=10;
}
b = 20;
Lint would complain about this.
I someone is interested about the MISRA guidelines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MISRA
> I personally would never turn this off, and I hate when a codebase
> requires it to be turned off because someone was not bothered enough
> by some warning to fix the root cause.
Right. That's why i wrote "OpenoOcd is broken".
Best Regards,
Carsten
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
