Re: Coverity Scan for GNUstep?

[Ivan Vučica]

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Richard Frith-Macdonald
<address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 29 Jan 2018, at 08:28, Fred Kiefer <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> re is a problem with these numbers. Coverity did only analyse about one 
>> third of the Objective-C files in GNUstep base and most likely only the 
>> smaller files. Coverity at the moment has issues with Objective-C protocols 
>> and only works with files where there are no references to any. That means 
>> we don’t know how many of the 1 million lines where actually checked for 
>> defects. The number 0.01 is basically meaningless :-)
>
> :-(
>
> Where do I look to find out about this?
> I don't think gnustep-base actually *uses* protocols much, so perhaps we can 
> figure out ways to work around this limitation?

Also sounds like it wouldn't be very useful with OS X code unless all
headers and code were stripped of protocols before processing with Coverity.