------- Comment #21 from thutt at vmware dot com 2010-09-03 13:07 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Is 'coverity' a compiler? I don't think so. >
Coverity is not a tool that generates code, but it does perform all the syntactic & semantic analysis that a code-generating compiler will. Then, it goes beyond that with further static analysis. > Do you have actual examples of > *compilers* which, everything taken into account, decided to make sure this > case is worth warning? That's the worst argument I've read in a long time. Do we need proof that another compiler does something before the gcc team will take it up now? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42884
