[cfe-dev] Clang Static Analyzer Feature Bounties

Jonas Toth via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Mar 6 12:28:57 PST 2018


Hi,

all code that shall land must pass review, which is done via
Phabricator: https://reviews.llvm.org

I think you could get inspired by this check:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rC326405 (final commit) and
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42645 (review process).
Getting started with clang-tidy might be simpler see
https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/#getting-involved for an
introduction. Both clang and clang-tidy are good for different things,
but its better an expert explains that, i think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQF6hjLKsnM is a good overview of the
basics.

Kind Regards, Jonas


Am 06.03.2018 um 17:29 schrieb Benjamin Bales:
> Hey guys, 
>
> Thanks for your insightful responses!  We've decided for now to first
> learn more about how development is done on the analyzer.  We are
> primarily interested in contributing to the development of new
> checkers, particularly buffer issues (e.g. buffer overflow).  Aside
> from looking at http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html
> and http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/checker_dev_manual.html, is there
> anything else we need to be aware of before we begin development? 
> Also, what is the procedure for getting new checkers approved to add
> to the list of potential checkers? 
>
> -Ben
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:41 PM, Artem Dergachev <noqnoqneo at gmail.com
> <mailto:noqnoqneo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Yeah, I guess, The LLVM Foundation might be the right contact for
>     the business/commercial side of things (not sure).
>
>     On the technical side - I'm currently reviewing a large portion of
>     patches for the analyzer. I'd be happy to review and accept any
>     patches, regardless of where they came from - under the usual
>     terms of the LLVM developer policy (you should totally have a look
>     at it). Most importantly, please discuss any non-trivial work
>     before you start coding, and split it up into small incremental
>     patches that gradually improve an experimental feature until it's
>     ready to be turned on by default - this is called "developing
>     under the flag". For example, a new checker will stay in the alpha
>     package during development, and an experimental analyzer core
>     feature will be disabled by an -analyzer-config option. The main
>     point here is to speed up reviews and make sure you don't need to
>     re-do anything - because it's extremely hard to do anything right
>     with LLVM in isolation. Of course, I cannot guarantee that any
>     particular patch is going to be accepted, at least not before I
>     see it.
>
>
>     On 02/03/2018 3:17 PM, Jonas Toth via cfe-dev wrote:
>
>         Hi,
>
>         no. I dont have any major position, i would just potentially
>         benefit
>         from the bounties :P
>
>         I dont know who has the power to decide about financial
>         questions, but
>         the LLVM deciders are most likely involved in it!
>
>         All the best, Jonas :)
>
>
>         Am 02.03.2018 um 23:21 schrieb Benjamin Bales:
>
>             Hi Jonas!
>
>             Nice to hear from you.  We could certainly add clang-tidy
>             to our
>             roadmap.  The primary reason we are interested in
>             improving the clang
>             static analyzer is because we build our commercial
>             product, CodeAI
>             (www.mycode.ai <http://www.mycode.ai>), on top of it.  I
>             am hiring an internal work force to
>             enhance the checkers, but I am interesting in exploring
>             open source
>             alternatives to push forward this work.  I have some
>             ideas, but I
>             think it would be best if we could arrange a phone call
>             next week
>             sometime to discuss things.  Are you the maintainer of
>             this project?
>
>             -Ben
>
>             On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Jonas Toth via cfe-dev
>             <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
>             wrote:
>
>                 Hi,
>
>                 nice to hear! Would you consider clang-tidy as second
>                 part of clangs
>                 static analysis framework as worthwhile, too?
>
>                 All the best, Jonas
>
>
>                 Am 02.03.2018 um 22:48 schrieb Benjamin Bales via cfe-dev:
>
>                     Greetings Clang Front End Developers!
>
>                     My name is Benjamin Bales, and I am the CTO and
>                     co-founder of
>                     QbitLogic, a startup company in Atlanta.  We are
>                     interested in
>                     sponsoring feature bounties to further develop the
>                     clang static
>                     analyzer.  Can someone recommend me a point of
>                     contact with whom I can
>                     open a dialogue? Let me know.  Thanks!
>
>                     Sincerely,
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 cfe-dev mailing list
>                 cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>                 http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>                 <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev>
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         cfe-dev mailing list
>         cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>         http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>         <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Benjamin Bales
> Chief Technology Officer
> QbitLogic
> 1180 West Peachtree Street, Ste. 2425
> Atlanta, GA 30309 
> 470-214-0598
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
> are addressed.  This communication may contain privileged attorney
> material or other Property and Confidential matter.  If you are not
> the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the
> e-mail for the intended person, be advised that you have received this
> e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing,
> or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.  If you believe you
> have received this e-mail in error, please immediately delete this
> e-mail and notify Benjamin Bales by telephoning 470-214-0598
> <tel:470-214-0598>.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180306/dae266fa/attachment.html>


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list