Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!caip!sri-spam!nike!styx!lll-crg!lll-lcc!qantel!hplabs!ucbvax!cad!faustus
From: faustus@cad.UUCP (Wayne A. Christopher)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: LINT
Message-ID: <323@cad.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-May-86 16:05:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: cad.323
Posted: Tue May 13 16:05:09 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 15-May-86 07:28:32 EDT
References: <457@brl-smoke.ARPA> <2452@watmath.UUCP>
Organization: U. C. Berkeley CAD Group
Lines: 13

In article <2452@watmath.UUCP>, rbutterworth@watmath.UUCP (Ray Butterworth) writes:
> I too used to think that most of what lint complained about was crap.
> I also noticed an awful lot of things that it didn't complain about but
> should have.  So I took the source and turned on all the options that
> normally make it shut up about certain things, and then added even more
> checks than lint ever had before.  Then I looked at all the crap in the
> output and gradually taught lint which one's really were crap and
> shouldn't be issued.  Now I have a version of lint with which I use
> four fifths of what it complains about.

Sounds great.  Can we have it?  (Post diffs to net.sources, maybe?)

	Wayne