> I'm more interested in running such tools locally Depending on the configuration, cppcheck scans can take 8+ hours to run. This can be greatly reduce with parallel checks at the cost of several checks being disabled.
> The other problem with cppcheck is that it doesn't build on an existing c++ parser from a compiler https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/3300446/cppcheck-clang-import They are working on a clang AST importer. Experimental support has already landed. > its signal/noise ratio is lower than e.g. coverity or clang-tidy. A couple of years ago, I investigated this issue and found that cppcheck is missing include locations. When I provided those, the number of errors reported dropped from 9000+ to several hundred. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Cppcheck At the time I manually generated include paths. Another option would be to use the ide-integration scripts to generate these. -Luke _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
