aaron.ballman added a comment.

In D71963#1798212 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71963#1798212>, @sylvestre.ledru 
wrote:

> I do agree that they are subjective and not perfect.
>
> However, I found the classification extremely useful when you look at the 
> results on big projects.
>  I have been using codechecker (where the severities are coming from) for 
> Firefox and its has been extremely useful to evaluate the importance of the 
> checkers.


IMO, that usefulness comes from consistency when picking a severity. I share 
the concern that these are pretty subjective descriptions currently. For 
instance, the guidance you give in this patch is somewhat different than the 
guidance picked by CERT 
(https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/How+this+Coding+Standard+is+Organized#HowthisCodingStandardisOrganized-RiskAssessment)
 and this will lead to discrepancies if it hasn't already.

>> For instance, the CERT rules all come with a severity specified by the rule 
>> itself
> 
> Did you see some difference?

I've not looked for them specifically yet (tbh, this severity thing caught me 
off guard, I didn't see the reviews for adding it), but my concern comes from 
the fact that the process of picking severity already differs between what's 
written and one of the coding standards we have checks for.

>> it if each coding standard has drastically different ideas about severity
> 
> Do you have some examples of this occurrence?

Not off the top of my head. I think it would be useful for someone to look at 
the coding standards we currently have clang-tidy checks for to see if those 
standards specify a severity for their rules. From there, we can see what 
commonalities there are between the coding standards and see if we can come up 
with a heuristic for picking a severity that roughly matches. Or maybe we 
should only specify a severity when one is picked by a coding standard and not 
attempt to determine our own.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D71963/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D71963



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to