Re: Microsoft vs. clang static analysis

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

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....)
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe