Abramo Bagnara

Il 13/12/21 04:37, Nicolas Pitre ha scritto:
I've also seen too many times a bug being introduced because the code
was modified just to make it [name your favorite static analysis tool /
coding standard here]-compliant. It is often the case that the code is
questionnably written in the first place, and adding typecasts to it
makes it worse even if the scanning tool is then happy.
I'd like make clear once and for all that the happiness of scanning tool is *never* a valuable purpose under a MISRA perspective.

What matter is *only* the quality of code and MISRA is a tool to achieve this purpose.

Il 13/12/21 04:37, Benjamin Lindqvist ha scritto:

Hopefully most people in the community agree that many, if not most,
Misra rules are outdated or even slightly harmful. But you optimize
with the constraint being the way the world works, not how it should
ideally work. If this is what it takes to get zephyr backed by Daimler
and Volvo, I for one can't blame the steering committee for thinking
the tradeoff is justified. I'd do the same thing probably, despite
loathing Misra with all my heart.
In my experience this is a consequence of a misunderstanding of what MISRA really is.

MISRA process has rules, but also deviations and permits and the only sane way to use it is as a tool to improve safety/readability/understanding/analyzability.

Please forget every other idea of it as an enemy to beat or to surrender to.

As Nicolas has already done you are welcome to point out *any* proposed change related to MISRA compliance that you think will make code worse together with an alternative proposal to improve code at the same time.

I hope this will clarify that everyone in the community has the same code improvement goal and, as usual, constructive collaboration is the key.

Abramo Bagnara


Join to automatically receive all group messages.