Back to list
Why Static Analysis Isn't Enough
Let’s face it, we all know that fixing issues early is better—it’s easier and less expensive. That’s why we do developer test. But some developers think that static analysis tools are less of a hassle than code review and will find enough of the bugs anyway. While static analysis tools are great at automatically checking code against pre-defined criteria, they only find certain kinds of violations of good coding practice. Peer code review finds additional classes of defects, the kinds of problems that only skilled humans excel at finding.
Join Capers Jones and Tom McCabe as they show you the metrics that prove that when used together, static analysis and code review find more bugs and inconsistencies than either technique alone.
“A synergistic combination of formal inspections, static analysis, and formal testing can achieve combined defect removal efficiency levels of 99%.”
Capers Jones, Combining Inspections, Static Analysis, and Testing to Achieve Defect Removal Efficiency Above 95%, January 2012.
Attend this webinar and learn:
The different types of defects identified by each technique and when to use each
Why static analysis cannot replace peer code review
The 3 steps to take to remove more than 99% of your defectsand improve software “evolvability”
How to use static analysis and inspections in regulatory and compliance-driven environments