Thanks for the feedback!
I will look at reducing the state stored by SuperDeallocState.
I will also add stack hints like "[super dealloc] was called here first" for
the first call, and "[super dealloc] was called a second time here", or similar.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ObjCSuperDeallocChecker.cpp:156
@@ +155,3 @@
+
+ // FIXME: A callback should disable checkers at the start of functions.
+ if (!shouldRunOnFunctionOrMethod(
----------------
zaks.anna wrote:
> Is this done for performance purposes? Can [super dealloc] be called from
> functions? isSuperDeallocMessage check seems faster.
This check was modeled after ObjCSelfInitChecker::checkPostObjCMessage() in
ObjCSelfInitChecker.cpp.
Heh, I see. The checks in shouldRunOnFunctionOrMethod() are redundant because
we're already passed a reference to an ObjCMethodCall.
I don't believe [super dealloc] is valid inside a plain C function context.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ObjCSuperDeallocChecker.cpp:161
@@ +160,3 @@
+
+ // Check for [super dealloc] method call.
+ if (isSuperDeallocMessage(M)) {
----------------
zaks.anna wrote:
> It would be better to do an early return here as well, unless you plan to
> expand this for handling other calls.
> if (!isSuperDeallocMessage(M))
> return;
Sure, will fix.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ObjCSuperDeallocChecker.cpp:182
@@ +181,3 @@
+ SymbolRef SelfSymbol = M.getSelfSVal().getAsSymbol();
+ const SuperDeallocState *SDState =
State->get<CalledSuperDealloc>(SelfSymbol);
+ if (!SDState)
----------------
zaks.anna wrote:
> These should be guarded on isSuperDeallocMessage. Otherwise, we would do a
> lookup every time we see a method call.
Got it! Will fix.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D5238
EMAIL PREFERENCES
http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
