Re: verification and linting of lua implementations

[Iain Hibbert <plunky@...>]

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Florian Weimer wrote:

> * Thomas Buergel:
>
> > Perhaps it might be worth to register Lua for Coverity Scan[1]?
>
> So that Coverity claims in a press release that Lua contains 88
> high-risk defects?  I'm not sure if this is such a great idea.

Sorry but that sounds ridiculous. I don't see how not looking at the code
in case you find a bug is in any way better than living with the
possibility that there is a serious bug, undetected.. Should we also not
run any unit tests?

I don't know how Coverity scans work, nor how much changes there were to
Lua 5.2, but since Lua 5.1.4 is included in the NetBSD sources now, it may
be possible at least to check if there were any serious issues there
before moving forward..

iain