Why negative to Clang Static Analyzer?

Project Infrastructure LLVM Dev List Archives
1

Hi KDE developers,

I have fixed 24+ bugs for k3b since 2017.04 k3b/ChangeLog at master · KDE/k3b · GitHub

And my sincere thanks will goto:

* David Faure, he helped me owing to I broke the dependency freeze, sorry to Albert!

* Thomas Schmitt, he taught me about ISO 9660 and MMC knowledage patiently and carefully

* Clang Static Analyzer, it hunted the potential bugs 387298 – Crash when I try to burn audio cd or mixed mode cd using wma files

But why so *IMPATIENT* and *IRRESPONSIBLE* for your commit when clang static analyzer detected the root cause?! it hurts K3B endusers!

LLVM and KDE developers reviewed the code ♟ xiangzhai firstly, then it is able to push to the UPSTREAM repository if LGTM, but why broke the *POLICY*?!

2

Dear David,
Thanks for your kind response!
Yes, all have been pushed after code review, it is good example of clang static analyzer, but PR387298 is the bad example, never mind, I fixed it, and also passed static and sanitizer (dynamic) analysis.
I respect KDE and LLVM developers who take responsibility for their commit, and positive to analysis report patiently. I don’t care who is not…
End users need BUG free application, but not full of bugs trash, sorry for my Cleanliness.

发自我的iPad

------------------ Original ------------------