If the source line changes then diff isn't a good enough tool. What is needed is a that these programs need to maintain a database that keeps a signature of each problem that is basically an AST of the area affected and is independent of source line and whitespace changes. Then you could annotate this database with information about false positives instead of your source. Such a database might even be able to keep new false positives from appearing if you duplicate the problem exactly in a different source file.
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Mr Rasmus Lerchedahl Petersen <rus...@eecs.qmul.ac.uk> wrote: >> Running a second time gives you only the false positives again. >> If some new bug is added to the source you still needed to read over >> the false positives (unless your memory is really good). >> >> long term we need to have a way to notify us when new errors are added. > Sounds like a job for diff? > > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
