john borland

Just incase someone is using it maybe mark the flag --clang as depricated in the next releaes. Given the amount of work it might make for a good google summer of code project should cppcheck ever want the feature back. I always thought the feature would be more useful for cppcheck internally as away to help debug changes in the c++ standards. I am not sure why someone would use it externally.

Hopefully the table below looks ok. I will attach 2 CSV files. The first one is called StatFile.csv and that is this table below. Which shows some stats about code coverage of a few of the CppCheck source code files and all the numbers are %. I checked 4015 Debian packages. I can say the Overall Coverage numbers are under estimates. When I looked at the gcov data I found that it was saying there were 220048 source lines, but going through the output it was counting files outside of cppcheck like...

Ok I just noticed some of the dates in those PR files I got the packages from. I will remove all the PR files from before Oct 6. Given that is about half of them I will probably add a few more and rerun my code. Hopefully I will see better coverage numbers on the low end. What ever happened to http://cppcheck1.osuosl.org:8000/? When I try to go to the link it says the website can't be reached. I was thinking of pulling the package list from there but the site seems down. I was hoping to also get...

I wrote a couple of bash scripts to run over the weekend to do code coverage of the released 2.22.0 version of cppcheck with debian packages (It's still running). I wasn't sure how you knows a package had C/C++ code in them, so I just pulled from the following 9 PR's below and hopped for the best. 2026-02-18_12-13-45-d234d745fefe-results.txt 2026-10-05_07-31-15-7f232989d1f9-results.txt 2026-10-09_20-01-23-da724f2e5700-results.txt 2026-09-08_13-51-12-2a0c507aec8b-results.txt 2026-10-05_14-59-08-c5bef2ae24cd-results.txt...

Depending on how many tokens you want to use here are other things you can ask AI about a PR. Will this PR require the cppcheck manual to change? if yes which sections. What unit test cover these changes? if no unit test is found can please write one. What do you think the intent of this PR is?

To me this talk has lived rent free in my brain since 2012 https://youtu.be/5wwKjdvPxa8 its about how CI can be used as a code reviewer. Most CI systems are pass fail. But there tea leaves that often go unnoticed. I think in the age of AI its probably a good idea to use AI as a first pass aproach to keep from getting overwhelmed. I even know of an open source project that is talking internally about poising their skill file to say all issues must be written using Shakespearen English. That way they...

I think one thing that matters a lot is how easy is it for you to integrate into your workflow. For me given that I learned to code inside a unix terminal and never evolved to using an IDE to code with AI isnt to difficult to record my interactions with. The script command https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/linux-script-command does alot of the heavy lifting. I also write a bit of data like starting and stopping git hash as well as the ai model version and token usage to a file. That way I can restore...

One thing I recomend when it comes to AI is to keep internal metrics so that you can better help you evluete AI future solutions. That includes keeping track of the work done by AI which you can put a tag in an issue or a tag in the git commit message. You will want to be able to match that tag to a prompt, token usage and model version number. That way if you want to make changes later to your AI process you can test it aginst past solutions to see if the change adds value. On a side note one thing...