|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: static analysis
From: Chris Evans (chris
ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk)Date: Fri Jun 30 2000 - 10:05:50 CDT
- Next message: Cooper: "Re: static analysis"
- Previous message: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- In reply to: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Next in thread: Cooper: "Re: static analysis"
- Reply: Chris Evans: "Re: static analysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Antonomasia <ant
notatla.demon.co.uk> said:
> > Where are the prizes for being quick and dirty ? This is clearly
> > based on last year's file race checker.
>
> I've got a much easier one:
>
> gcc -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
>
> See? No Perl hackery required. Will even catch many other errors the
> proposal didn't.
And an example fragment of faulty code plus GCC output would be....?
Chris
- Next message: Cooper: "Re: static analysis"
- Previous message: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- In reply to: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Next in thread: Cooper: "Re: static analysis"
- Reply: Chris Evans: "Re: static analysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]