Cppcheck VS Clang Static Analyzer

Cppcheck Reviews

Clang Static Analyzer Reviews

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 / about 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: 11 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

Clang Static Analyzer mentions (7)

• Improvements to static analysis in GCC 14

  Clang has a similar tool, the Clang Static Analyzer: https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 22 days ago

• Memory Safe or Bust?

  Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment [CI/CD] pipelines play a crucial role in enforcing code quality, especially when working with memory-unsafe languages. By integrating automated dynamic analysis tools like Valgrind or AddressSanitizer, static analysis tools like Clang Static Analyzer or cppcheck, and manual code review processes, developers can identify and mitigate many memory-related... - Source: dev.to / about 1 month ago

• Static Code analysis

  No one static analyzer catches everything. It's best to run multiple. Popular ones are cppcheck, clang-analyzer, GCC static analyzer in GCC 10+, flawfinder, lizard. Source: about 1 year ago

• Checked C

  With "cross translation units" (CTU) analysis a static analyzer could derive a constraint on `some_function` return value and check this against the array size to detect a possible bug. The Clang static analyzer [1], used through CodeChecker (CC) [2], do support CTU (enabled with `--ctu`). I'm very happy with the result on the code I'm working on. Of course this is not magic, and it's important to understand the... - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• What's in your tool belt?

  Cppcheck and Clang Analyzer: statically analyze your code to find bad style and bugs (undefined behavior) respectively. Clang Analyzer can actually be frighteningly clever and has a low false positive rate (unlike most other non-commercial static checkers). Source: almost 2 years ago