Re: [RFA] gdb_ari.sh patch to eliminate wrong critical errors

["Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>]

Pierre,

>   The current ARI page look much better!
> Only the inline and hash critical bugs remain.

I'm not sure if these categories really make sense ...

>   To get a ARI page that would better
> catch new regression, I could move all
> deprecated and obsolete bugs that have
> currently a zero count to ari_regression category,
> this would trigger them to appear on front,
> before the large table if someone reintroduces them.

As the comment at the top of gdb_ari.sh, there are two
types of checks:

# Permenant checks take the form:

#     Do not use XXXX, ISO C 90 implies YYYY
#     Do not use XXXX, instead use YYYY''.

# and should never be removed.

# Temporary checks take the form:

#     Replace XXXX with YYYY

# and once they reach zero, can be eliminated.

Only those checks that *can* regress should be moved to
the ari_regression category, those that cannot (e.g. use
of a function that has actually been removed) should just
deleted completely.


>   There are 6 deprecated functions that have a -1 count.
> Which seems to be related to function name appearing in comments
> or disabled code.

There is some logic that subtracts 2 from the count (to avoid
counting the function definition and declaration).  This logic
gets it wrong in some cases; e.g. it leads to negative values
for some functions that have already been completely removed.

(On the other hand, even some functions with count 0 are in
fact still used, because the one use happens to be in a file
that is for some reason excluded from the ARI scan.  So you
should double-check for each case you remove that there is
indeed no more reference.)


Thanks for working on clearing up the ARI!

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com