Subject: Re: [boost] Coverity Static Code Analysis
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-04 11:16:04
>> Well, since you brought up the issue... I'm not a lawyer either,
>> but I'd *not* agree to anything like:
>> Coverity may, in its sole discretion, modify or revise these
>> terms and conditions and policies at any time, and you agree
>> to be bound by such modifications or revisions.
>> That's the fourth line of text, and I quitted reading. (Does
>> this have a name? "You'll agree with me for the eternity,
>> whatever I'll say"... Perhaps "The God Almighty Pact"?)
> Wow, that's pretty draconian, I must say!
None the less quite a number of very well known projects seem to have
accepted it: perl, gcc, gdb, tcl etc etc.
Personally I *would* rather like to see Boost put through a static analysis
tool on a regular basis: so I'm wondering if we should bite the bullet and
sign up for this?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk