Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-06-13 Thread Jason Merrill
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Christopher Di Bella wrote: >> I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead >with anything > > My employer has given me the okay to contribute to gcc, provided that I > follow some fairly straightforward rules. Most

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-06-11 Thread Christopher Di Bella
> I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead with anything My employer has given me the okay to contribute to gcc, provided that I follow some fairly straightforward rules. Most of these things are given, such as "don't contribute to gcc while at work", "don't put

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-17 Thread Jason Merrill
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > Please also note that, in terms of legal papers, the FSF is much more > flexible than one may think, but they are not very pro-active or fast > (in my past experience, things may have changed now). If you find

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-17 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 17 May 2016 at 12:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote: >> I don't know the status of the static analysis tool the Microsoft were >> planning to release, which would do a lot of the checking. > > As far as I'm aware, this is a Visual Studio tool, and thus closed > source. I might be wrong!

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-17 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 17 May 2016 at 12:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote: > Just letting you know I'm still alive! > > I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead > with anything; for now, it's just personal research to help ease into > it. Approval may take a month or

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-17 Thread Mikhail Maltsev
On 05/17/2016 02:10 PM, Christopher Di Bella wrote: > >> I don't know the status of the static analysis tool the Microsoft were >> planning to release, which would do a lot of the checking. > > As far as I'm aware, this is a Visual Studio tool, and thus closed > source. I might be wrong! Some

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-17 Thread Christopher Di Bella
Just letting you know I'm still alive! I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead with anything; for now, it's just personal research to help ease into it. Approval may take a month or two, as I work for a large corporation. > I don't know the status of the static

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-10 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 09/05/16 10:18, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 8 May 2016@02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote: If not, I'd like to get a start on implementing a warning system for them. I'll create a branch, but I doubt it'll be ready for gcc 7.1's release. Hi, I don't think anyone is working on that yet. See

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-09 Thread Jason Merrill
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 8 May 2016 at 02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I've been tracking gcc-digest for a bit, but would like to be a little >> more involved in the development of gcc. >> >> I haven't been able to find

Re: CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-09 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 8 May 2016 at 02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been tracking gcc-digest for a bit, but would like to be a little > more involved in the development of gcc. > > I haven't been able to find anything about the CppCoreGuidelines in > gcc -- I'm wondering if there's a warning

CppCoreGuidelines warnings

2016-05-07 Thread Christopher Di Bella
Hi all, I've been tracking gcc-digest for a bit, but would like to be a little more involved in the development of gcc. I haven't been able to find anything about the CppCoreGuidelines in gcc -- I'm wondering if there's a warning system in the pipeline that I might have missed in the digest