[cfe-dev] GSoD: analyzer checker docs?

[Kristóf Umann via cfe-dev]

Sounds like the thing we always needed in my opinion! The analyzer could
really use some better docs in certain areas -- speaking from
personal experience, I always thought that I just need more time to
learning about the codebase before being able to understand patches related
to, for example, liveness analysis. It wasn't until I attended Gábor
Horváth's advanced compilers lectures at my university, when I understood
that that is in fact something that exists in the literature, and the thing
that we have in the analyzer is "merely" an implementation of it. I really
liked what he said during the Birds of a Feather meeting on EuroLLVM, is
that we do have many things documented, but it's scattered all over the
place in youtube videos, cfe-dev mails, patch review discussions, bugzilla
reports (especially before 2012) and the like. If under GSoD we could get
this sorted out, get rid of most of HTML files we have on
https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/, and have an easy-to-navigate,
easy-to-extend documentation for the long term, it would be far more
inviting for newcomers as well. I might be biased, but the Clang Static
Analyzer is very cool project, and I think if we made the transition from
writing your first checker to making changes in the actual infrastructure a
little easier, we would have a a lot easier time building a community
around it.

Couple thoughts of mine, I haven't read through the entire GSoD procedure
thought.

On Sat, 20 Apr 2019 at 03:12, Artem Dergachev <noqnoqneo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Tanya made this call for Google thing of Docs, which is like summer of
> code just for docs
> (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2019-April/062121.html).
> There's been a lot of work on checker docs in the Analyzer recently. Do
> we want to take this opportunity?
>
> Like, if it gives us a nice, stylish, easy-to-understand, on-point
> description of what the checker thinks the user's code is doing and how
> bad does it think it is, it might be pretty neat.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20190420/4fe3a9a7/attachment.html>