Hi Andy,
On 9/28/07, Andy Whitcroft <[email protected]> wrote:
> That is unfair. Every time we discuss it I state that I disagree that
> hiding mostly useful tests is a good thing. I would love the tests to
> be 100% accurate, but if I removed all the tests that can false positive
> I would literally have none. There is a balance to be struck and we
> have significantly different ideas on where the balance is.
Are you disagreeing with the numbers Ingo posted? 25,000 false
positives for the kernel is beyond silly... Existing conventions
should matter a lot and the default configuration for a static code
checker should really be 100%. So why not hide the potentially useful
warnings under -Wtoo-strict or similar command line option?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
