Re: clang static analyzer

On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 10:39:56AM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

quoted

  2. If it is a false positive, see what it would take to silence clang
     and submit a patch.  I don't think we are opposed to annotations
     that help analysis tools as long as those annotations aren't too
     intrusive or make the code less readable.

I'm a bit skeptical here.  Going down that route might mean that we'll 
eventually have to add all sort of crap to accommodate everyone's 
preferred static analysis tool of the day.  Would be far nicer to try to 
make those tools more intelligent instead, or at least make them 
understand an out-of-line annotation format that does not clutter the 
code itself.

To be clear, I am a bit skeptical, too. I would really prefer an
out-of-line annotation if one is available. But I am trying to encourage
the OP to actually make a patch for one instance so we can see just what
it would look like. Then we actually have a data point to discuss.

-Peff