Uma an\'alise comparativa de ferramentas de an\'alise est\'atica para detec\~ao de erros de mem\'oria
Abstract
--- Portuguese version As falhas de software est\~ao com frequ\encia associadas a acidentes com graves consequ\encias econ\'omicas e/ou humanas, pelo que se torna imperioso investir na validac\~ao do software, nomeadamente daquele que \'e cr\'itico. Este artigo endereca a tem\'atica da qualidade do software atrav\'es de uma an\'alise comparativa da usabilidade e efic\'acia de quatro ferramentas de an\'alise est\'atica de programas em C/C++. Este estudo permitiu compreender o grande potencial e o elevado impacto que as ferramentas de an\'alise est\'atica podem ter na validac\~ao e verificac\~ao de software. Como resultado complementar, foram identificados novos erros em programas de c\'odigo aberto e com elevada popularidade, que foram reportados. --- English version Software bugs are frequently associated with accidents with serious economical and/or human consequences, being thus imperative the investment in the validation of software, namely of the critical one. This article addresses the topic of software quality by making a comparative analysis of the usability and efficiency of four static analysis tools for C/C++ programs. This study allow to understand the big potential and high impact that these tools may have in the validation and verification of software. As a complementary result, we identified new errors in very popular open source projects, which have been reported.
Turn this paper into a lesson
ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.