Cppcheck VS Jansson

I dedicated Sunday morning to going over the documentation of the linters we use in the project. The goal was to understand all options and use them in the best way for our project. Seeing their manuals side by side was nice because even very similar things are solved differently. Cppcheck is the most configurable and best documented; JSON Lint lies at the other end.

Using infer, someone else exploited null-dereference checks to introduce simple affine types in C++. Cppcheck also checks for null-dereferences. Unfortunately, that approach means that borrow-counting references have a larger sizeof than non-borrow counting references, so optimizing the count away potentially changes the semantics of a program which introduces a whole new way of writing subtly wrong code.

Also check out (cppcheck)[https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck] if you want more static analysis

My browser refuses to open that link. This is better: https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck

cppcheck - Extensible C/C++ static analyzer focused on finding bugs.

and five C/C++ static code analyzers: * clang-tidy * oclint * cppcheck * cpplint (recently added!) * include-what-you-use (recently added!)

Start by feeding your codebase to a static analysis tool like cppcheck, to rule out obvious bound-checking mistakes in it.

Cppcheck is free. I've previously used it with a C++ project.

I'm a fan of jansson easy to use and great documentation

Context: I needed to emit rather complex compound JSON data for a C-based project I'm working on. I could do it all with sprintf(), but it got messy quickly. I looked at available libraries such as jansson and CCAN's json, but they both used malloc(), which isn't an option in my case.

I find jansson quite usable and minimal: https://github.com/akheron/jansson

JanSON has been really good for my uses. Simple, intuitive, fast.

I don't see why something like Jansson wouldn't.

Jansson - Library for encoding, decoding and manipulating JSON. MIT