Re: [Wireshark-commits] rev 47326: / /trunk/tools/: checkhf-v2.pl

[Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Bill Meier <wmeier () newsguy com> wrote:
> On 1/28/2013 2:58 PM, wmeier () wireshark org wrote:
> > Log:
> >   Re-implemention of checkhf.pl:
> >    Main objective: reduce the number of false positives.
> >    Normal usage: the same as for checkhf.pl.
> >
> >   For now: named checkhf-v2.pl
>
> I've just committed a re-implementation of checkhf.pl and named it
> checkhf-v2.pl.
>
> I'm not really sure how to handle this type of situation:
>
> 1. Retire (delete) checkhf.pl and then commit new version
>    with the same name. (It is a new program).
>    (More or less completely hides the original; It's obviously
>    still in the repository if you know how to find it).
>
> 2. Just commit the new version as a diff from the previous
>    (essentially removing almost all the lines of the old and
>    adding the new). (Keeps the history).
>
> 3. Give the re-implementation a different name.
>    Keep the old in the repository.
>
> Maybe #2 is the way to go....
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Bill

I'm perfectly happy with #2. The new script looks very nice.

Tangentially, CppCheck [1] has support for custom checks using
plugins. I've never had time to investigate properly, but I suspect
that implementing the three check scripts (checkhf, checkAPIs,
checkfiltername) as CppCheck plugins would be a major win, primarily
because we'd get real C grammar parsing for free.

Cheers,
Evan

[1] http://cppcheck.sourceforge.net/
___________________________________________________________________________
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