There are actually 91 errors described in the article, but number 90 looks nicer in the title. The article is intended for C/C++ programmers, but developers working with other languages may also find it interesting.
errors
Myths about static analysis. The second myth - expert developers do not make silly mistakes.
While communicating with people on forums, I noticed there are a few lasting misconceptions concerning the static analysis methodology. I decided to write a series of brief articles where I want to show you the real state of things.
The second myth is: "Expert developers do not make silly mistakes that are mostly caught by static code analyzers".
This is how this statement looks in discussions on forums (this is a collective image):
The second myth is: "Expert developers do not make silly mistakes that are mostly caught by static code analyzers".
This is how this statement looks in discussions on forums (this is a collective image):
Big Brother helps you
I was convinced one more time that programmers write programs absolutely carelessly, so that their programs work not because of their skill but due to chance and care of Microsoft or Intel compiler developers. Right it is they who really care and put crutches under our lop-sided programs when necessary.
Further is a byte-rending story of the CString class and daughter of its, the Format function, for you to read.
Further is a byte-rending story of the CString class and daughter of its, the Format function, for you to read.
Static analysis of source code by the example of WinMerge
The today's post is devoted to the question why tools of static source code analysis are helpful regardless of programmer's knowledge and skill.
Difference of code analysis approaches in compilers and specialized tools
Compilers and third-party static code analyzers have one common task: to detect dangerous code fragments. However, there is a great difference in the types of analysis performed by each kind of these tools.
