|
|
I'll check this out.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
I am surprised that anyone has not heard of a linter ...
I grew up with compilers who did those kinds of things. Compilers not allowing just any kind of dirt, because 'you asked for it, you got it'. When C came on the scene, my generation quickly made shell macros to always run lint before running the compiler, to get something resembling what they were used to with the compilers of the old days.
In my last job, we tightened some of the Lint rules, redefining a few warnings as errors, and required the build job to be aborted if lint reported an error. The logging system reported the number of (non-fatal) lint warnings for each build to a statistics module, to monitor the development of code quality.
We gradually changed to Python, and although there is a sort of Python-lint, it never was mandated. The programmers were happy: They were no longer bugged by these nasty remarks of bad code quality.
Sadly, I am not surprised that far too many of my workmates will call such development "progress".
|
|
|
|
|
Static analysis tools do not provide any value in modern programming. When they were first invented compilers had almost zero effective error reporting so using a second tool with pattern matching to find those before compilation seemed like a good idea.
The authors or companies pushing them often claim benefits that do not exist.
Bugs in software which are actually significant, where significant means costing time (and thus money) to fix come from logic errors and system errors which static analysis tools cannot identify by their very nature.
Adherence to static analyzers can actually end up creating code that is not as easy to maintain and even end up introducing bugs. This happens when developers just try anything to get it to pass. The argument proponents make about that problem is that developers should be more diligent. But of course the same argument applies to why one might claim that a static analyzer is a good idea in the first place. Why are those very same diligent developers being nit-picked in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
From what I can see, all we're using it for is ensuring code formatting is correct. So now I have to go back and remove extra lines, or empty spaces at the end of line, etc. Seems like a real time waster to me
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Could be, but those kind of things can point to sloppiness that is more problematic.
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the open source projects I've contributed to have a code formatting script that will do that part for you.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
That is quite an opinionated answer. Responding to it would almost certainly create a flame war.
@GregUtas has made a static analyzer and described it in an article. Maybe, if you have a different opinion, you can write an article explaining your point of view. That way we would all be able to evaluate its merits.
Simple, definitive statements like "Static analysis tools do not provide any value in modern programming." remind me of the famous H. L. Meknken quote: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:20pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Okay wait a minute. @jschell was clearly talking about compiled (and implied strongly typed) languages in their post.
I can think of a ton of reasons why someone would want to lint JS code, or for that matter any duck typed code, but even moreso JS with it's sort of haphazard evolution from ECMAScript and the syntax weirdities that brings.
None of them really apply to C and C++, unless you stretch.
Modern compilers are really good at teasing out potential problems in your code that would otherwise be caught by static analysis tools.
That doesn't really apply to JS.
So this is apples and oranges.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:22pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't be what person? The person that dared disagree with you and politely said so?
Gosh, maybe you really *shouldn't* visit this place.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:22pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Excuse me? You came in here being like "don't be that guy" and then basically "you're the reason I don't post here" after I simply disagreed with you.
Right after you got done disagreeing with the original poster.
Physician, heal thyself.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:22pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The thread is there for everyone to see. I'm satisfied with my estimation of this exchange. You were the one attacking other people here. Not me.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
@Honey
I am imagining a sock puppet on each of your hands flaming each other during this exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I really didn't want it to get to that point.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I see what happened. The other commenter seems to have deleted their account or all their posts - not sure which. It makes the whole thing weird.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
I read the reply. It was polite.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:22pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, that escalated. Maybe you should take your own advice and shouldn't post here.
I'm not the one attacking other commenters for simply disagreeing, insulting their professional skills, and generally being a nuisance.
I had to look at your profile to make sure you weren't a troll on a temporary account.
*I* bring the site down? Again, some self awareness might do you some good.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:21pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You're just in attack mode now. It's not professional. I'm done with you.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Oct-22 17:21pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
