Cast VS Cppcheck

Cast Reviews

Cppcheck Reviews

Cast mentions (6)

• Best Zoom alternative for online recording?

  Cast is an online solution for podcasting and online recording. It records audio and video locally and syncs it to the cloud, which allows users not to worry about Internet connection failures and ensures high quality of the recorded content. The tool isn’t overloaded with features and isn't pricey. Source: over 1 year ago

• Recording audio online !

  I use Cast. It's subscription but not too expensive. Source: about 2 years ago

• How to Record a Podcast

  We’ve been using Cast (https://tryca.st/) for over a year now. We’ve tried some other options like zencastr which I’m not a fan of and local recording which didn’t work that great due to the age of my cohosts computer. Cast works really well and allows a cheap option for hosting and editing too. Although I actually use Descript and Audition for editing. Source: over 2 years ago

• Recording remotely

  I used Castfor my last podcast and loved it. I thought the editing interface was kind of clunky, so there was a little work to do importing and exporting. But hosting with someone in another city plus having a guest in a third location worked great. Source: about 3 years ago

• Im brand new

  For me, the biggest hurdle was figuring out hosting. I ended up going with a platform called CAST which folds a lot of things into one bundle. You can record, edit, host, and publish your podcast from that one location. Source: about 3 years ago

Cppcheck mentions (10)

• Configuring Cppcheck, Cpplint, and JSON Lint

  I dedicated Sunday morning to going over the documentation of the linters we use in the project. The goal was to understand all options and use them in the best way for our project. Seeing their manuals side by side was nice because even very similar things are solved differently. Cppcheck is the most configurable and best documented; JSON Lint lies at the other end. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

• Enforcing Memory Safety?

  Using infer, someone else exploited null-dereference checks to introduce simple affine types in C++. Cppcheck also checks for null-dereferences. Unfortunately, that approach means that borrow-counting references have a larger sizeof than non-borrow counting references, so optimizing the count away potentially changes the semantics of a program which introduces a whole new way of writing subtly wrong code. Source: 12 months ago

• Static Code analysis

  For my own projects, I used cppcheck. You can check out that tool to get a feel. Depending on what industry your in, you might need to follow a standard like Misra. Source: about 1 year ago

• How do you not shoot yourself in the foot ?

  Https://cppcheck.sourceforge.io/ (there are many other static analysis tools, I just haven't used them or didn't care for them). Source: about 1 year ago

• Linting tool for prohibiting the use of specific std types

  Sounds like something that could simply be communicated with the team that writes the tests. Unless you have dozens of such classes. In that case, you could just use e.g. Cppcheck and add a rule (regular expression) that searches for usages of the forbidden classes. Source: over 1 year ago