[PATCH] D70439: [Analyzer][Docs][NFC] Add CodeChecker to the command line tools

Thu Dec 5 09:46:07 PST 2019

martong added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/codechecker.html:13
+<div id="page">
+<!--#include virtual="menu.html.incl"-->
+<div id="content">
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Note related to your patch, but SSI seem to be completely broken these days; previously the dropdown menus header kept working on the front page but now even that's missing. Patches are very welcome >.<
Ok, actually, this line is a result of copy pasting from scan-build.html. I don't think I'd be competence enough to solve the drop-down menu issue, so, I just removed this line.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/codechecker.html:28
+<p>
+The <tt>check</tt> command will print an overview of the issues found in your project by the analyzers.
+</p>
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> I'm confused. I obtained an overview, but what are the steps that i need to do if i want to actually view the issues? I have to start the web server anyway, right? Then what's the point of of invoking check separately? Can you invoke check from the web server directly?
> 
> I wish this document looked more like a step-by-step guide on how to obtain the results (or how to set up a collaborative server). Right now it's a collection of seemingly unrelated solutions for sub-problems that I don't immediately understand how to combine in order to obtain the desired result. 
Ok, I've rewritten this to be more like a step-by-step howto and to be as simple as possible. 

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/command-line.html:18
+
+<p>The following tools are used commonly to run the analyzer from the command line.
+Both tools are wrapper scripts to drive the analysis and the underlying invocations of the Clang compiler:
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> The first thing that we want to underline here is that the user should ABSOLUTELY NOT try to read warnings from the command line. I still see a lot of users who try to read scan-build's standard output and understand warnings from there without seeing any path notes.
> 
> I suggest the following intro:
> 
> "Static Analyzer is by design a GUI tool. Its purpose is to find buggy execution paths in the program, and such paths are very hard to comprehend by looking at a non-interactive standard output. It is possible, however, to invoke the Static Analyzer from the command line in order to obtain analysis results, and then later view them interactively in a graphical interface."
Okay, I added it at the beginning of the first paragraph.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/command-line.html:19
+<p>The following tools are used commonly to run the analyzer from the command line.
+Both tools are wrapper scripts to drive the analysis and the underlying invocations of the Clang compiler:
+<ol>
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Do you plan to eventually mention clang-tidy as well?
Ok, I added that since CodeChecker can handle clang-tidy checkers too.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/command-line.html:22-27
+  <ul>
+    <li>Preferred on macOS.</li>
+    <li>In tree, part of the LLVM project.</li>
+    <li>Provides limited and unsupported <a href="https://clang.llvm.org/docs/analyzer/user-docs/CrossTranslationUnit.html">Cross Translation Unit (CTU) analysis</a> capabilities.
+    </li>
+  </ul>
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> WDYT of the following:
> 
> Scan-Build is an old and simple command-line tool that emits static analyzer warnings as HTML files while compiling your project. You can view analysis results in your web browser.
> - Useful for individual developers who simply want to view static analysis results at their desk, or in very simple collaborative environment.
> - Works on all major platforms (Windows, Linux, macOS) and is available as a package in many linux distributions.
> - Does not include support for cross-translation-unit analysis.
Sounds good to me, updated like that.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/command-line.html:28
+  </ul>
+  <li><a href="codechecker.html">CodeChecker</a></li>
+  <ul>
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Let's describe the tool a bit as well. Maybe something like this:
> 
> CodeChecker is a web server that runs the Static Analyzer on your projects on demand and maintains a database of issues.
> 
> - Perfect for managing large amounts of Static Analyzer warnings in a collaborative environment.
> - Generally much more feature-rich than scan-build.
> - (more stuff here)
Ok.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/command-line.html:31
+    <li>Preferred on Linux.</li>
+    <li>Out-of-tree, not part of the LLVM project, hosted on github.</li>
+    <li>On Linux there are many projects for embedded devices which are built only with GCC.
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> LLVM is now also hosted on github, so not sure what the message is. We should probably either provide a link or just say that it's out-of-tree.
Ok, I removed the "github" part.

================
Comment at: clang/www/analyzer/command-line.html:32-33
+    <li>Out-of-tree, not part of the LLVM project, hosted on github.</li>
+    <li>On Linux there are many projects for embedded devices which are built only with GCC.
+    CodeChecker converts these GCC invocations to the appropriate Clang invocations, this way the CSA can work on these projects seamlessly.
+    </li>
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> [[ https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-9.0.0/clang/tools/scan-build/libexec/ccc-analyzer#L350 | The same is true for scan-build ]].
> 
> Also, while it is possible that one of the tools does a strictly better job than the other, but the problem is, i think, generally unsolvable, because there's no perfect correspondence between GCC flags and Clang flags. So i think we should avoid strong statements here ("work seamlessly") - even intercepting the build system (let alone setting correct compiler flags) is an unsolvable problem in general.
Alright, I removed this list item.

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D70439/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D70439