I got a run of something like Coverity a few months ago. 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2645. The Qpid code base had 
something like 0.14 complaints per 1000 lines of code (32 issues / 224k LoC), 
300x better than industry average. And even the complaints could be argued.

In the proposed fixes for issue 2645:
 1. use-after-free case only prints the address of the object that was freed
 2. use-without-null-test prints the object address
 3. Using "delete this" in object destructor. If that was going to be a problem 
your test system would have melted down a long time ago.

If you are interested in getting Coverity results published for the project you 
get my

+1

-Chuck


----- "Ken Giusti" <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: "Ken Giusti" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2010 9:58:26 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: static analysis
>
> Hi all,
> 
> While cruising slashdot (guilty pleasure), I found that Coverity
> offers their static analysis code tool for qualifying open source
> projects.  See:
> 
> http://scan.coverity.com/
> 
> I've used this tool in the past on a previous employer's large C++
> project.  As with any automated code checker, the signal/noise ratio
> can be rather bad, but it did find a few real issues.
> 
> From what I can tell, the project doesn't get access to the tool -
> rather, Coverity runs the tool over the sources and makes the results
> available to the project. There's a faq for getting a project signed
> up:  http://scan.coverity.com/developers-faq.html   To get started
> we'd have to designate an official contact.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> -K
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]

Reply via email to