sylvestre.ledru added a comment. In D36051#1792909 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D36051#1792909>, @whisperity wrote:
> I am a little bit conflicted about the //Severity// column. While I know our > people put a great deal of effort into keeping this classification sane, what > was put into CodeChecker is, at the end of the day, a pretty arbitrary > classification. Sure, static analysis is often subjective... Coverity has some classification too. From my experience, the one from code checker matches pretty well. > I think RSTs support comments, right? Maybe it should be indicated in the > code (as a comment only) where the severity was taken from, so if someone > comes up with a reason to change a checker's severity, they could also submit > a patch to CodeChecker's knowledge-base. Added, thanks for the idea! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D36051/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D36051 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
