VIM XTU Analysis

Baseline:

VIM without xtu - clang 4.0 http://cc.elte.hu:8080/#run=75

VIM XTU with XTU - clang 4.0

http://cc.elte.hu:8080/#run=76

###Summary

Bug numbers do not match those on the linked viewer. The reason behind this is that we used bug deduplication not yet committed into the CodeChecker codebase.

Analyzed project	All Non-CTU Findings (baseline)	All CTU Findings	New CTU findings	Disappeared findings	Successfully analyzed	Failed to analyze	Analysis Time (baseline)[s]	Analysis Time XTU (1st Phase + 2nd Phase)[s]	Median of bug path length (BPL) in baseline	Median of BPL CTU	Median of BPL of new findings	Median of BPL of disappeared findings
vim	78	160	97	23	61 files	1 files	145.7	466 + 6	9.5	15	17	21

New findings

------------------- Bugs grouped by checker ------------------
------------------------------------------
Checker ID                         | Count
------------------------------------------
NOT FOUND                          | 15   
core.CallAndMessage                | 7    
core.NonNullParamChecker           | 18   
core.NullDereference               | 31   
core.UndefinedBinaryOperatorResult | 7    
core.uninitialized.Assign          | 3    
core.uninitialized.Branch          | 6    
unix.Malloc                        | 10   
------------------------------------------


------------------- Metrics ------------------
Total # of bugs:             97
MIN BugPath length:          3
MAX BugPath length:          93
Mean length:                 23.9484536082

 %:      25% percentile: 14.0
 %:      50% percentile: 21.0
 %:      75% percentile: 32.0
 %:      90% percentile: 41.0

Most important true positives found with XTU

1. core.NullDereference http://md-mtas2.tsp.eth.ericsson.se:4999/#baseline=7&newcheck=8&report=1049

False positives

1. http://md-mtas2.tsp.eth.ericsson.se:4999/#baseline=7&newcheck=8&report=1046 (actually the conclusion is correct, but does not consider that there is such a programming convention in c)