Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Static Analysis results of doctest #83

Closed
martinmoene opened this issue Jul 21, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Static Analysis results of doctest #83

martinmoene opened this issue Jul 21, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@martinmoene
Copy link
Contributor

martinmoene commented Jul 21, 2017

martinmoene/doctest Static Analyses.

Contains

@martinmoene martinmoene changed the title doctest Static Analyses Static Analysis results of doctest Jul 21, 2017
@onqtam
Copy link
Member

onqtam commented Jul 21, 2017

Thanks for these!

Currently doctest is per-push statically analyzed with these: Cppcheck / Clang-Tidy / Coverity Scan / OCLint / Visual Studio Analyzer (as can be seen here) - but to be clean I pass quite a bunch of suppression flags though...

I'll look into the lists you supplied in a few weeks when I have more time - they are exactly the ones I'm not currently using.

@martinmoene
Copy link
Contributor Author

You're welcome.

I had not looked at .travis.yml in earnest, I'm easily intimidated when it's larger then 42 lines 😉 .

One on the most intriguing messages:

doctest.h:992 'short' type cannot be unsigned

I like the order int short unsigned as written.

@onqtam
Copy link
Member

onqtam commented Aug 11, 2017

weird - I think short can be unsigned...
Anyway I've written it that way so I can easily glance over the overloads that are provided and check if something is missing - in any other context I would write it as unsigned short

I'm going through the logs at the moment and fixing some things, but not all - many of them I would suppress.

onqtam added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 11, 2017
@onqtam onqtam closed this as completed in 6e80847 Sep 5, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants