Open landroni opened 9 years ago
It seems to be a good idea. :-)
By the way, some staff at Codegears decided to analyze the Unreal Engine code using CppDepend and CQLinq, described in the article http://www.codergears.com/Blog/?p=965
In my opinion, it is needed to know first the best practices, and the link speaks about some ones in C++.
Some days ago I also set up a buildbot for otter which is already running:
http://qutebrowser.org:8011/waterfall
It currently runs cppcheck
and scan-build
(from clang).
Here we go:
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/4221
The code is pretty uniformly clean, with no high impact issues, and with only 0.12 Defect Density. You need to connect with your Github account to view the bugs.
excuse this question from a technically interested casual user: 164,617 lines of code? is that all written exclusively for Otter or does it also include QtWebKit?
The stats concern only Otter, so I suspect it's 164,617 lines of C code in Otter.
Hm, I wonder where it's getting this metric from - I get something quite different:
$ find . \( -iname '*.cpp' -o -iname '*.h' -o -iname '*.js' \) -exec cat {} \; | wc -l # inside the src/ dir
41839
Yeah, not sure about that. Maybe they explain their methodology in the docs...
As per http://codemonkey.org.uk/2014/08/13/year-coverity-linux-kernel-scans/
(LOC based on C preprocessor output)
I don't know what that means...
@landroni That probably means the lines of code count includes the expanded #include sections in the code.
It should be ran through it again in order to see if any new bugs have popped up.
Have you considered auditing your code using the automated scan utility Coverity? https://scan.coverity.com/
Their tool is being used by heavy-hitters like LibreOffice, Linux Kernel, Firefox or Python. It may be worth submitting Otter to Coverity, too, to watch out for pesky implementation omissions.
If there is interest, I could set up the coverity scan and perform an initial assessment of defects.