Re: Stories from static analysis of the Octave code base

[Rik]

On 01/04/2019 12:19 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 1/4/19 2:35 PM, Rik wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> It's been a humbling experience going through the issues detected by static
>> analysis of the Octave code base
>> (https://wiki.octave.org/PVS_static_analyzer_-_5.0_Release).  Frankly, I
>> thought the code base was better than it turned out to be.  Besides flat
>> out calling the wrong function (e.g., double_value instead of
>> xdouble_value), I just found and corrected a surprisingly simple but
>> pervasive performance hit for any exceptional value (-Inf, Inf, NaN).
>
> Well, that's embarrassing.  I probably made the original mistake.  Oops.
>
> But I don't think we should be too hard on ourselves.  It is a bit
> disappointing to find mistakes like this, but I'm glad that things are
> improving.  And I think we have made a lot of progress in the last few
> years to make Octave much better than it was.

Yes, on the optimistic side there has been enormous improvement.  I think
5.0 is going to be a really nice piece of software.

--Rik