Isn't it very similar to something Clang has had for years?
Compiling with clang is much, much slower but it finds interesting errors sometimes. I only had to ifdef out one code section that it couldn’t understand (something about indexing an array with a constexpr function returning an enum class from a template parameter).
It depends on the project, but this one and another project I made work are both 100k lines of C++ and took half a day to setup. It was worth it imo.
It might have something to do with a heavy usage of templates in a few files, I don't know.
Clang's autovectorization is better in a few functions I disassembled but otherwise the generated code doesn't benchmark any faster, it's better in some places, worse in others.
But TCC is 10x faster than both of them.
In GCC it's a compiler flag. In LLVM it's a convoluted process automated by either an irritating perl/python script (The python one isn't included by default for some reason despite being far more common these days) or AN ENTIRE WEB SERVER TO OUTPUT TEXT (Which thankfully isn't included by default).
I'm sure you could set it up in make but since my projects aren't large scale enough to really need it I can't be bothered, even if it's one of those things you'll probably only need to write once and can just copy and paste ad-infinitum.
-% scan-build10 make
scan-build: Using '/usr/local/llvm10/bin/clang-10' for static analysis
...
scan-build: No bugs found.
clang --analyze --analyzer-output text ...
Hopefully in a future version the kinks are ironed out and we can just use the flag without any hassle. It's like if we needed to still manually link our files with ld before compiling them instead of clang auto doing it.