|
From: Konstantin S. <kon...@gm...> - 2010-02-18 09:32:00
|
Hi, Some of you have probably seen this already: http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2010/2/69354-a-few-billion-lines-of-code-later/fulltext/ I've got real pleasure from reading it. Even though the article is about a static analysis tool, most of it applies to dynamic tools as well. I wonder if valgrind folks would be willing to write something like this about memcheck or other tools? --kcc |
|
From: David S. <da...@si...> - 2010-02-19 20:57:58
|
On Thursday 18 February 2010 10:31:28 Konstantin Serebryany wrote: > Hi, > Some of you have probably seen this already: > http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2010/2/69354-a-few-billion-lines-of-code-late > r/fulltext/ I've got real pleasure from reading it. Even though the article > is about a static analysis tool, most of it applies to dynamic tools as > well. > I wonder if valgrind folks would be willing to write something like > this about memcheck or other tools? > > --kcc Nice read. It shows many obstacles that can happen when a company is selling a static bug checking tool. It's funny that he discovered "typedef char int;" in production code. :-) Also the image in the article can be seen here in action: http://artport.whitney.org/commissions/codedoc/Paley/CodeProfiles_800x600.htm |