To get a trial key
fill out the form below
Team License (a basic version)
Enterprise License (extended version)
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
GBP
RUB
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Free PVS-Studio license for Microsoft MVP specialists
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at


If you haven't received our response, please do the following:
check your Spam/Junk folder and click the "Not Spam" button for our message.
This way, you won't miss messages from our team in the future.

>
>
PVS-Studio Team Is Impartial When Writi…

PVS-Studio Team Is Impartial When Writing Articles

Aug 07 2018
Author:

Our team checks various open source projects using PVS-Studio and writes about the results of the code analysis. From time to time, we come across strange accusations of bias. We think that this is often trolling and entering into a discussion with such people does not make sense. On the other hand, we do not want to leave such comments unanswered either. Therefore, I decided to write a small article so that I could answer people by giving them just one link to it.

0580_PVS_Studio_Team_Is_Impartial/image1.png

We have written and continue writing articles on checks of various projects. We are doing marketing education. Developers learn useful information and at the same time get acquainted with the PVS-Studio code analyzer. Moreover, by accumulating experience on checks of open source projects, we gather the information that allows making very interesting publications, such as:

Now about the negative reaction. Some articles suddenly cause very critical and even badmouthing comments. There were many of such articles and I do not remember all of them, but here are some:

So many things we are blamed for. Starting with complaints that we wanted to decry achievements of project authors, that a competitor bribed us and that special-order article specifically discredited a project, that we are blackmailers and we write bad articles when a company doesn't buy a license. Generally, we heard a lot of stuff.

I responsibly declare that when writing articles, we are absolutely impartial. We describe what we see. If there are a lot of errors, we write that there are a lot of them. If a project is of high-quality, we write that we could not find errors:

Our goal is to promote the methodology of static analysis as a whole and demonstrate the abilities of PVS-Studio. To do this, one does not need to distort the results. If we did not find any errors in a single project, we will find them in another one. That's all, there is no conspiracy.

Various authors write articles. Articles turn out different. Sometimes we are too enthusiastic, trying to show that no one is immune from bugs and typos. Sometimes articles can contain bad humor. However, we do not want to offend anyone or tarnish. By the way, we did the same publications about ourselves as well.

Our team raises money by selling licenses and selling expertise (audit of the customer's code). Almost the entire code of our clients is closed. Accordingly, it makes no sense to look for the reason why we decided to write about errors in any open project. This project just happened to become the object of research. It does not matter if something was found or not.

By the way, anyone can suggest a project to check. Nevertheless, we do not promise that we will check it in the near future and that we will actually check it. There are too many projects. And yet, especially in the lead-up to any events, we give preference to projects of a certain kind. When we were adapting PVS-Studio for checking embedded applications, it was a rational decision to check RT-Thread IoT OS rather than, for example, a game. Soon we are planning to show PVS-Studio for Java and will obviously switch to open Java projects. Therefore, I am giving a hint. You do not necessarily have to wait until we check your favorite project. You can do this yourself using the trial version.

0580_PVS_Studio_Team_Is_Impartial/image2.png

I hope, I dispelled the spirit of a conspiracy theory. Thank you all for your attention. Try PVS-Studio yourself. You will like it!

Popular related articles
Static analysis as part of the development process in Unreal Engine

Date: Jun 27 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

Unreal Engine continues to develop as new code is added and previously written code is changed. What is the inevitable consequence of ongoing development in a project? The emergence of new bugs in th…
Technologies used in the PVS-Studio code analyzer for finding bugs and potential vulnerabilities

Date: Nov 21 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

A brief description of technologies used in the PVS-Studio tool, which let us effectively detect a large number of error patterns and potential vulnerabilities. The article describes the implementati…
Free PVS-Studio for those who develops open source projects

Date: Dec 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

On the New 2019 year's eve, a PVS-Studio team decided to make a nice gift for all contributors of open-source projects hosted on GitHub, GitLab or Bitbucket. They are given free usage of PVS-Studio s…
How PVS-Studio Proved to Be More Attentive Than Three and a Half Programmers

Date: Oct 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

Just like other static analyzers, PVS-Studio often produces false positives. What you are about to read is a short story where I'll tell you how PVS-Studio proved, just one more time, to be more atte…
The way static analyzers fight against false positives, and why they do it

Date: Mar 20 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

In my previous article I wrote that I don't like the approach of evaluating the efficiency of static analyzers with the help of synthetic tests. In that article, I give the example of a code fragment…
The Ultimate Question of Programming, Refactoring, and Everything

Date: Apr 14 2016

Author: Andrey Karpov

Yes, you've guessed correctly - the answer is "42". In this article you will find 42 recommendations about coding in C++ that can help a programmer avoid a lot of errors, save time and effort. The au…
PVS-Studio for Java

Date: Jan 17 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

In the seventh version of the PVS-Studio static analyzer, we added support of the Java language. It's time for a brief story of how we've started making support of the Java language, how far we've co…
PVS-Studio ROI

Date: Jan 30 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

Occasionally, we're asked a question, what monetary value the company will receive from using PVS-Studio. We decided to draw up a response in the form of an article and provide tables, which will sho…
Appreciate Static Code Analysis!

Date: Oct 16 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

I am really astonished by the capabilities of static code analysis even though I am one of the developers of PVS-Studio analyzer myself. The tool surprised me the other day as it turned out to be sma…
Characteristics of PVS-Studio Analyzer by the Example of EFL Core Libraries, 10-15% of False Positives

Date: Jul 31 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

After I wrote quite a big article about the analysis of the Tizen OS code, I received a large number of questions concerning the percentage of false positives and the density of errors (how many erro…

Comments (0)

Next comments
This website uses cookies and other technology to provide you a more personalized experience. By continuing the view of our web-pages you accept the terms of using these files. If you don't want your personal data to be processed, please, leave this site.
Learn More →
Accept