Re: Static Analyzer doesn't always analyze all touched files?
Re: Static Analyzer doesn't always analyze all touched files?
- Subject: Re: Static Analyzer doesn't always analyze all touched files?
- From: Matt Neuburg <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:42:55 -0800
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:25:43 -0800, Jerry Krinock <email@hidden> said:
>Ever since we got the Product > Analyze, I’d assumed that this was supposed to analyze, at least, all touched files, analogous to the behavior of Product > Build. But I’ve long suspected that it doesn’t always do that.
>
>Tonight, after coding some memory-management tricks on a non-ARC project, I did a Product > Analyze and, after a few *seconds*, it did not report an issue I was expecting it to. (It did report the usual 1 warning in the Sparkle framework and 36 warnings in sqlite.c, which are known false alarms.) So, as a test, I added this obvious memory management error to a method…
>
> NSString* x = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:@"Hello"] ;
> NSLog(@"%@", x) ;
> // No further reference to x
>
>I then executed Product > Analyze again, and after a few seconds again, this issue was not reported in the results either.
This is a wild and crazy guess, but I wonder whether the analyzer / Xcode bases its knowledge of what's changed on fsevents. There is a severe fsevents bug that can block the contents of some folders; certainly I've had Time Machine fail to perceive what's changed (and for that reason, I've stopped using it).
https://github.com/thibaudgg/rb-fsevent/issues/10
m.
--
matt neuburg, phd = email@hidden, http://www.apeth.net/matt/
Programming iOS 7! http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920031017.do
iOS 7 Fundamentals! http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920032465.do
RubyFrontier! http://www.apeth.com/RubyFrontierDocs/default.html
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden