Coverity Reviews

We use Coverity primarily to find issues such as software bugs and memory leaks, especially in C++ and C# projects. It helps us identify deadlocks, synchronization issues, and product crashes.

Coverity has been instrumental in resolving product crashes by detecting various issues like deadlocks. It helped us resolve synchronization issues in automobile companies where products were not able to shut down.

The most valuable feature of Coverity is its interprocedural analysis, which is advantageous because it compares favorably with other tools in terms of security and code analysis. It is particularly effective for C++ and C# languages.

Coverity's implementation cycle is very slow when integrating changes, especially for problems related to event handling and memory leaks. The dashboard is not well integrated with SonarQube, presenting compatibility issues. Additionally, the Coverity license fee is very high, making it tricky for individual developers.

I have been working with Coverity for more than 15 years.

There may be financial allocation challenges. They are not due to Coverity itself.

The customer service is friendly and responsive to existing issues. That said, they have limitations when the solution lacks certain features. They still try their best to help with what is within their control.

Positive

SonarQube is used for comparison as it is cheaper. However, Coverity is preferred for its specific advantages.

The setup process is reasonably easy for minimal deployment, though some issues may arise with new licenses.

Coverity is considered expensive compared to other tools like SonarQube, which is much cheaper.

We also evaluated SonarQube.

Coverity is highly recommended for organizations using C++ or C# due to its advantages in interprocedural analysis, which detects various issues efficiently.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.