We performed a comparison between GitLab and Polyspace Code Prover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."GitLab is a solution for source code management, container registry, pipelines, testing, and deployment."
"Git hosting has an integration with ACD which is why we liked this solution in the first place."
"We're only using the basic features of GitLab and haven't used any advanced features. The solution works fine, so that's what we like about GitLab. We're party using GitHub and GitLab. We have a GitHub server, while we use GitLab locally or only within our team, and it works okay. We don't have any significant problems with the solution. We also found the straightforward setup, stability, and scalability of GitLab valuable."
"The most valuable features of GitLab are the CI/CD pipeline and code management."
"This is a scalable solution. We had around 200 users working with it."
"It is a speedy platform compared to the others I have used. I have also enjoyed using the platform as this solution offers a good user experience."
"I have found the most valuable feature is security control. I also like the branching and cloning software."
"We like that we can create branches and then the branches can be reviewed and you can mesh those branches back. You can independently work with your own branch, you don't need to really control the core of other people."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"We'd always like to see better pricing on the product."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration into the CI/CD pipeline, an autocomplete search tool, and more supporting documentation."
"The initial setup was quite challenging because it takes some time to understand how to pull out or push the code."
"The solution does not have many built-in functions or variables so scripting is required."
"GitLab can improve by integrating with more tools, such as servers with Docker."
"Some of the scripts that we encountered in GitLab were not fully functional and threw up errors."
"GitLab could improve the patch repository. It does not have support for Conan patch version regions. Additionally, better support for Kubernetes deployment is needed as part of the package."
"The integration and storage capabilities could be better."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
GitLab is ranked 7th in Application Security Tools with 70 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube and Tekton, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork, CodeSonar and Veracode. See our GitLab vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
