[PATCH] D13446: [PATCH] Add checker discouraging definition of variadic function definitions in C++

[Daniel Berlin via cfe-commits]

Apologies, I will try to take a look today

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, 10:05 AM Aaron Ballman <aaron.ballman at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron.ballman at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>
> wrote:
> >> > dberlin added a subscriber: dberlin.
> >> >
> >> > ================
> >> > Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/cert-variadic-function-def.rst:13
> >> > @@ +12,2 @@
> >> > +`DCL50-CPP. Do not define a C-style variadic function
> >> >
> >> > +<
> https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/cplusplus/DCL50-CPP.+Do+not+define+a+C-style+variadic+function
> >`_.
> >> > ----------------
> >> > I'm sure this is oversight on CERT's part, but their website actually
> >> > has terms of use (click the terms of use at the bottom of the page)
> that
> >> > says this can't be copied/reused, and here you are, copying it.
> >> > It explicit says: "
> >> > Use of the Service. You may only display the content of the Service
> for
> >> > your own personal use (i.e., non-commercial use) and may not
> otherwise copy,
> >> > reproduce, alter, modify, create derivative works, or publicly
> display any
> >> > content. "
> >> >
> >> > Before this is accepted, someone should email cert and say "hey, uh,
> >> > yeah, this seems bad", and get them to okay you doing this.
> >> > I'm sure they'll go and fix this.
> >>
> >> That's an excellent point, I will bring it up internally (I work for
> >> CERT) and report back.
> >
> >
> > Any news here?
>
> Yes; I have heard back from CERT's legal team, and they have a
> document that I have sent (off-list) to Daniel for review. If it seems
> like it would resolve his concerns, then I think the next step will be
> to bring it to the LLVM foundation more formally to see how they would
> like to handle it.
>
> ~Aaron
>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ~Aaron
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > http://reviews.llvm.org/D13446
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20151103/346c36ce/attachment.html>