On 12/21/2013 5:28 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
In article <mailman.4486.1387663424.18130.python-l...@python.org>,
Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote:
On 12/21/2013 10:10 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
On the last large C++ project I worked on, we decided (i.e. obeyed a
corporate mandate) to start using Coverity's static analysis tool on our
15 year old codebase. I learned a few things about static analysis then.
CPython was about that old when Coverity started giving us reports on
the C part of CPython (about 400000 loc). CPython is now essentially
free of errors detected by Coverity.
How many of those errors were real, and how many were "I suppose,
technically, this isn't quite correct but in real life, it's just never
going to be an issue?" I'm not being cynical here; I'm interested to
know if it really helped.
http://search.gmane.org/ search gmane.comp.python.devel for 'Coverity'
and you should get some relevant hits.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
