Re: clang analysis

[Stephen Fisher <steve () stephen-fisher com>]

On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 10:57:51PM +0300, Kaul wrote:

> I've ran clang static analyser on SVN latest and got the following:

> Obviously, there's little chance I can fix all of them. I can try fix 
> a few from the dissectors I'm familiar with, though.

Every little bit of assistance helps!  What OS are you running clang on?  

I started to compile Wireshark on MacOS 10.6 once I saw your message the 
other day and ran into a few problems it noticed that gcc doesn't seem 
to care about.  The main one was what I termed backwards overflow ;).  
These were cases where a negative number was assigned to an unsigned 
32-bit integers that makes gcc go to zero then to 2^32 and then down the 
right number.  A hex number represents it easily in text, but the 4.2 
million or so is hard to follow.

Please open a bug report at https://bugs.wireshark.org with just some of 
the details on what you found - you don't have to list everything of 
course.  It sounds like it would be best tackled by others using clang 
also I would think.


Thanks!

-- 
Steve
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe