Hacker News Reader

Comment by gravypod | Hacker News Reader

Every one of these points is just "use a static analyzer" and while I appreciate that I definetly don't appreciate them pushing Microsoft's static analysis tooling rather then Free tooling.

I'd honestly welcome a post about different static analysis tooling that's libre and open source. Their pros and cons as well as how to deploy them would be good too.

View on HN

How do those people dare to charge money and sell proprietary products!

Also this is about PVS-Studio, nothing to do with Microsoft, they don't own the Studio word.

I have no problem with paying for a program with my money. I do have a problem paying for a program with my freedom.

I'm sure Andrey would be willing to give you the source code, or even just straight out GPL/BSD license it to everyone if you paid enough. So you see, it still comes back to the problem that you aren't willing to pay what is requested.

PVS is a product that performs a service. They have made major efforts to port this product to Linux; they have multiple articles scanning Linux FSF products and the Linux Kernel.

People deserve to be paid for their work if it's useful.

The author of this article is Andrey Karpov. He develops his own static analyzer called PVS-Studio. This article was originally published on his company's website: http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0391/. If anything, he is pushing his own (proprietary) static analyzer, not Microsoft's one.

A lot of the PVS-Studio analyses are described in enough detail that if someone wanted to, they could implement them as clang checkers. clang is definitely open source, I don't know about "libre" though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com