static tools: may vs. must analysis
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C
- Stars
- 80
- Forks
- 33
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
For static tools it would also be good to know how many false negatives where explicitly reported (as “no error”), and how many data races were reported as “may exist” or “definitely exists”. This makes quite a difference in ranking/triaging of bugs (I didn’t read all of the text, it might be mentioned somewhere).
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No file, test, or entry point is named. Start by reviewing how the benchmark suite records static-tool results, focusing on “no error,” “may exist,” and “definitely exists”; done means false negatives and race reports are counted separately by certainty.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- c
- Domain
- devtools, testing-qa
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100