Re: [PATCH] D10305: [Clang Static Analyzer] Bug identification
phillip.power added a comment. Hi Babati, We at Sony are interested in this feature so that our tools can suppress undesirable bug warnings. You described at the end of the summary that you have thought about introducing new hash calculation algorithms if needed. How do you expect this to work? i.e. would bug_id_1 always be generated along with new improved bug_ids in the same plist file or would you expect the new bug_ids to replace old ones. I am hoping that the analyzer will always keep generating old bug_ids so that we can maintain backwards compatibility. Regards, Phillip SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D10305: [Clang Static Analyzer] Bug identification
phillip.power added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305#262534, @xazax.hun wrote: > - Should we require the generation of old hashes once a change is introduced, > or should we expect users who rely on old hash to maintain the old hash > generation as an out of tree patch? I will likely release the analyzer with all the previous hashes generated by default. I am happy to enable old hashes out of tree, as long as enabling is a small change. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305#262534, @xazax.hun wrote: > - The hash calculation WILL change in the near future once we figured out how > to identify checkers properly (but I think it will not make sense to rename > the hash for this change). For this reason I think we should mark this > feature as experimental, until that change is introduced. What is the > recommended way, to do that? Generating a comment to the plist? Just adding a > comment to the headers? Only mention it in the commit log? How close is "the near future"? I would like to start using the hashing feature in the next couple of weeks. If your checker identification improvements are a long time out, I would like you to submit the current hash as non-experimental. Best regards, Phillip SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D10305: [Clang Static Analyzer] Bug identification
phillip.power added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305#268795, @xazax.hun wrote: > > How close is "the near future"? I would like to start using the hashing > > feature in the next couple of weeks. If your checker identification > > improvements are a long time out, I would like you to submit the current > > hash as non-experimental. > > > As soon as I get some feedback for this mail: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-October/045368.html . I think > Anna and her team is busy right now due to the LLVM Meeting. IMO the idea makes good sense and I can benefit from it when moving checkers from experimental packages to other packages. > If I do not get a response, I will commit this patch as is, and address those > questions in a separate commit. Thanks. http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
