Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Microsoft vs. clang static analysis
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:45:17 -0800
On Feb 17, 2011, at 3:52 PM, Guy Harris wrote:

> We weren't tagging no-return functions as such in a way Microsoft's tools recognized

We now are tagging our own no-return functions that way, and that squelched a bunch of warnings - Microsoft's analyzer now knows that, for example, DISSECTOR_ASSERT() never returns.  (Now, a lot of those are the null-pointer errors that we're suppressing for now, but....)