On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 01:13 -0500, David Narvaez wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:19 AM, David Malcolm
<dmalcolm(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Good to hear; thanks for trying it and reporting back.
>
> This may sound like a strange question, but when you say it "worked
> great", presumably it builds, but does the test suite pass? I sent the
> patch thinking that we'd have to have a bit of to-and-fro on this
> mailing list, and I'm a bit disturbed that it worked first time :)
Hey,
I just had time to get back to this project again (and my little
endless project related to static analysis). I built the plugin
(version 0.10) which uses the patch you provided in this thread and it
passes many tests. It fails others but as far as I remember, it has
always failed some tests here, so I don't think those failures are
related with the C++ build - I could check this week, though.
The selftests check the output from gcc against a "gold" output, so
they're rather over-specified, and thus fragile. Sorry about that; it's
clearly not the best way to write them...
I'm happily using the plugin now, so if anything strange had to
happend because of the C++ build, I think it would have happened now.
I'll keep writing my checker and will let you know if anything bizzare
comes around.
Thanks for this project, it is awesome :) I wish I had a lot more time
to contribute more.
Thanks for the feedback, and for the kind words :)