Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

[gcc][docs] Elaborote on the configuration a bit more #4097

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 1, 2023

Conversation

Szelethus
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@Szelethus Szelethus added documentation 📖 Changes to documentation. gcc 🐃 GNU GCC Static Analyzer labels Nov 23, 2023
@Szelethus Szelethus added this to the release 6.23.0 milestone Nov 23, 2023
@Szelethus Szelethus requested a review from dkrupp as a code owner November 23, 2023 12:05
CodeChecker check -l ./compile_commands.json \
--analyzers gcc \ # Run GCC analyzer only
-e gcc \ # enable all checkers starting with "gcc"
-d gcc-double-free \ # disable gcc-double-free
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a specific reason we want to disable this checker, or this is just for the sake of example? I believe, I know the answer, but maybe we shouldn't use a flag in a documentation which presents the usage of gcc analyzer.
Also, I would suggest using the full name of flags in documentations: --enable, --disable.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With respect, I disagree with this comment -- and the enable/disable falgs seem consistent with other sections in this document.

@Szelethus Szelethus merged commit 454bbf0 into Ericsson:master Dec 1, 2023
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
documentation 📖 Changes to documentation. gcc 🐃 GNU GCC Static Analyzer
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants