<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Dec 18, 2014, at 1:25 AM, Manuel Klimek <<a href="mailto:klimek@google.com" class="">klimek@google.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">Yep, the general idea is:<br class="">1. if it's using ASTMatchers or PPCallbacks, make it a clang-tidy check<div class="">2. if it's using the CFG / being path sensitive, make it a Static Analyzer checker</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Note that static analyzer checkers are integrated in clang-tidy automatically - usually style rule stuff is much easier expressed in clang-tidy though (and I don't think static analyzer checks are integrated well with fix-its (but I'm not sure), and style violations usually have easy fix-its).</div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>+1 </div><div><br class=""></div><div>We do have several non-path sensitive checkers in the Static Analyzer (for example checkers based on RecursiveASTVisitors), so adding those to the static analyzer could also be an option.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>One issue I can see here us that the clang-tidy output does not support reporting paths from the path sensitive checks. Adding plist output option to clang-tidy which supports paths reporting could be a useful enhancement.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>(Please, CC me on all the patches to the Static Analyzer.)</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu Dec 18 2014 at 1:40:05 AM Sean Silva <<a href="mailto:chisophugis@gmail.com" class="">chisophugis@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class="">+Manuel<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">clang-tidy seems like a natural place for things that find "<span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:14.720000267028809px" class="">design rule violations".</span></div></div><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:14.720000267028809px" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div class=""><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:14.720000267028809px" class="">-- Sean Silva</span></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Gábor Horváth <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:xazax.hun@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="">xazax.hun@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class=""><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">Hello everyone,</span></p><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class=""><font class=""><span style="line-height:115%" class="">I am an
intern at a company where we developed several checkers based on the clang
infrastructure. We have about 30 checkers that are either C++ core language or
STL related. We would like to contribute some of these checkers (together with
the documentation and the test cases). The ones that are well tested and have
good false positive rates.</span></font></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class=""><font class=""><span style="line-height:115%" class=""><br class=""></span></font></span></p><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class=""><font class=""><span style="line-height:115%" class="">Most of
the checkers were originally developed find certain design rule violations. One
example of a design rule at this company is: „The emptiness of a container
should be checked using the empty method instead of the size method. It is not
guaranteed that size is a constant-time function, and it is generally more
efficient and also shows clearer intent to use empty. Furthermore some
containers may implement the empty method but not implement the size method.
Using empty whenever possible makes it easier to switch to another container in
the future.” We realized that, maybe such checkers could be useful for the
clang community as well.</span></font></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class=""><font class=""><span style="line-height:115%" class=""><br class=""></span></font></span></p><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class=""><font class=""><span style="line-height:115%" class="">Our tool
right now is a clang plugin that runs custom frontend actions on the analyzed
source code. The reason is that, some of the checkers are only consist of
ASTMatchers, some of them using RecursiveASTVisitors, some of them are clang
Static Analyzer checkers. We are wondering what would be the desired way to
contribute those checkers back. Should we focus on migrating them to
clang-tidy? Should we focus on transforming them to Static Analyzer checkers?</span></font></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class=""><font class=""><span style="line-height:115%" class=""><br class=""></span></font></span></p><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">Thanks,</span></p><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="">Gábor Horváth</span></p>
</div>
<br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">
cfe-dev mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank" class="">cfe-dev@cs.uiuc.edu</a><br class="">
<a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" target="_blank" class="">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br class="">
<br class=""></blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">cfe-dev mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:cfe-dev@cs.uiuc.edu" class="">cfe-dev@cs.uiuc.edu</a><br class="">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>