|
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: Cooper (Cooper
Linuxfan.com)Date: Fri Jun 30 2000 - 12:44:12 CDT
- Next message: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Previous message: Chris Evans: "Re: static analysis"
- In reply to: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Next in thread: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Reply: Cooper: "Re: static analysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> 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.
This doesn't work because at compile time the contents of the formatting
string is unknown. Because of that gcc won't scream about this.
Really crappy example:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{ char input[2000];
char output[3000];
int first=1,second=2,third=3;
scanf("%2000s",input);
sprintf(output,input,first,second,third);
return 0;
}
Yeah, I know, when you see code like this you check that business card
again to make sure it really does say "programmer" on it. It's crap and
I know it. It's just to make a point.
Cooper
-- If you can read this you're probably not dead yet. - Johnny The Homicidal Maniac 7 -
- Next message: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Previous message: Chris Evans: "Re: static analysis"
- In reply to: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Next in thread: Horst von Brand: "Re: static analysis"
- Reply: Cooper: "Re: static analysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]