[PATCH] Include checker name in Static Analyzer PLIST output

[Anna Zaks]

I don't believe the checker name should be used for bug identification. The checker names are implementation detail. The bug message/name and category are better for this. If we think that we might be changing the names of categories, we might come up with some kind of a stable ID.

For example, this patch, which is currently in review (http://reviews.llvm.org/D6178), will move the implementation of a set of warnings from one place/checker to another.

I'd suggest to only use the bug message and it's location. (We should already do that in  the CmpRuns script.)

What do you think?


http://reviews.llvm.org/D6841

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/