Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #27609

Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations

Path csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!news.dfncis.de!not-for-mail
From Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations
Date Mon, 5 Feb 2018 23:18:05 +0100
Lines 6
Message-ID <fds3gtF1745U1@mid.dfncis.de> (permalink)
References <p52lfh$nrr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <teo97d1vcjb3g15npbtkci906cven11rf7@4ax.com> <p532dr$196u$1@gioia.aioe.org> <23oa7d9a3nks55apfgduiobie10ijob7bm@4ax.com> <p54og4$a65$1@reader2.panix.com> <p56mkp.2a0.1@stefan.msgid.phost.de> <p577t1$o54$1@reader2.panix.com> <p5a8to.4v4.1@stefan.msgid.phost.de>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace news.dfncis.de GTiEX7xO0Y9czWjHlE1ysQBA/oLYU/bcUkaoo6aatEwBHWh2qQY1sbUD+O
Cancel-Lock sha1:wOn+sOGLYAV3+B1PfK99yeK+KE4=
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To <p5a8to.4v4.1@stefan.msgid.phost.de>
Content-Language de-DE
Xref csiph.com comp.arch.embedded:27609

Show key headers only | View raw

Am 05.02.2018 um 18:48 schrieb Stefan Reuther:
> The problem now is that C99's way of being
> explicit is the 'UINT32_C' macro

Where on earth did you get that idea?  UINT32_C does not even _appear_ 
in the C99 standard.

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Source code static analysis tool recommendations John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-02 13:32 -0800
  Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-02-02 18:24 -0500
    Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-02 17:13 -0800
      Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-02-03 03:40 -0500
        Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2018-02-03 11:45 +0100
        Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2018-02-03 16:37 +0000
          Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2018-02-04 10:18 +0100
            Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2018-02-04 15:12 +0000
              Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2018-02-05 18:48 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2018-02-05 23:18 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-06 09:34 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2018-02-06 19:25 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-06 22:53 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-02-06 21:34 -0500
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-07 09:06 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Jack <jack4747@gmail.com> - 2018-02-05 23:32 -0800
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-06 09:34 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-06 10:23 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2018-02-06 19:05 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-06 23:02 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2018-02-07 02:02 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-07 09:21 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2018-02-08 00:57 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-08 10:46 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2018-02-07 20:04 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-07 20:54 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2018-02-08 18:58 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-02-09 09:17 +0100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2018-02-10 20:55 +1100
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2018-02-10 19:59 -0500
                Re: Source code static analysis tool recommendations Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2018-02-10 20:49 +1100

csiph-web