steakhal wrote: > > Unless you plan to add more heuristics, I'd prefer a more concrete option > > name, like AssumeSuccessfulWrites=true. This would better describe it imo. > > I do not like totally the name "Pedantic", it could be > "AssumeOftenUncheckedOperationsMayFail". I am not sure if this behavior is > needed only on write operations, the intent was to remove failure branches > from all operations that are often unchecked.
The docs within `checkers.td` says `If false, assume that stream write operations do never fail.`. Given this and your last reply, maybe we should consider elaborating the description to reflect that more operations could be affected by setting this option. > I feel that "AssumeOftenUncheckedOperationsMayFail" does not provide more > information than "Pedantic" (≈ report issues that are often left unchecked), > while it is significantly longer, so my preferences are _Pedantic > > AssumeSuccessfulWrites > AssumeOftenUncheckedOperationsMayFail_. I think we can disagree. Given that this isn't such a serious change, it should be fine to continue as you planned. One remark, inside the `clang/test/Analysis/stream-pedantic.c` could we have `no-warning` markers for the places where the pedantic mode would raise issues? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87322 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
