Talk:Static program analysis
|WikiProject Computing||(Rated Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Computer science||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|Sources for development of this article may be located at|
Is it just me, or is someone spamming computer pages with: Citations from citeseer and a link that is some generic search for that topic. http://citeseer.org/cs?q=static+and+code+and+analysis This needs to be stopped
I've just added a link to a (static HTML) page which has a list of static code checkers because the old list (which was useful) was pulled.
You are correct. 184.108.40.206 is spamming wikipedia with CiteSeer links.
Hello, my addition to the category "Category:Software_anomalies" and the "see also"-link to the article: Anomaly_in_software were removed on 24th December. Please rethink, because this would be appropriate, see e.g. in the article, I give examples like "data flow anomaly" and "control flow anomaly". Also see in the text for anomalies in general. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 11:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
A link to the above page should be added to this one somewhere I think. --Bernard François 21:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I see a list of static checkers in the external links. I don't want to spam the article unnecessarily, but does it make sense to add a list of them? At least some of the more notable ones like FXCop (http://www.gotdotnet.com/Team/FxCop/) or PMD (http://pmd.sourceforge.net/). Thoughts? This isn't my article, so I didn't want to step on toes. 220.127.116.11 17:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- Both of them already have articles, see FxCop and PMD (software). Andreas Kaufmann 19:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I'm being to picky, but if you're going to use the word 'most' in relation to infinite set ('undecidable problems'), don't you need to specify what sort of 'most' your talking about?JustinMH (talk) 14:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)