New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
integration: add static code analysis tool; #377
integration: add static code analysis tool; #377
Conversation
I was thinking about going for this one: https://golangci-lint.run/ it has your tool integrated. |
this is going to take some time, it doesn't really state where the errors are, just writes some names... |
i have executed this locally and it spits out way too many false positives for example for "unused" properties in a struct. That may be the case, when you just look at the struct itsself, but since we embed that given struct in other structs, it is in fact used. EDIT: This is the bug: golangci/golangci-lint#826 EDIT 2: For the moment i would stay with the staticcheck tool |
f0ddec9
to
8f6affc
Compare
@selm0 mind approving this? |
i like the idea of integrating static code analysis.. |
You could disable |
in fact i didn't integrate it into my goland, but used the go linter plugin which basically is a wrapper around golangci-lint. That however was putting my macbooks down on its knees because it was too weak to handle it. Or in other words: i wouldn't be able to be productive on the machine ^^ |
@j4k4 i guess you will let me know about your findings and i will wait for you then? |
you will be using https://golangci-lint.run/ now? |
Might try the suggestion of @selm0. this might also be worth a try: https://blog.jetbrains.com/phpstorm/2020/12/early-access-program-for-qodana-a-new-static-analysis-and-quality-management-tool-by-jetbrains-is-open/ |
aef1085
to
cf6274e
Compare
ff83ea3
to
5cc8366
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i like adding the static checks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me.
5cc8366
to
688f6da
Compare
@j4k4 i removed some stuff you added yesterday. Please take a look at my rebase fixes commit if that is ok with you. |
all good |
d0d6a58
to
5aef503
Compare
@selm0 what do you think about this?