NoQ added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MallocChecker.cpp:727 - // Skip all operator new/delete methods. - if (isa<CXXMethodDecl>(FD)) - return false; - - // Return true if tested operator is a standard placement nothrow operator. - if (FD->getNumParams() == 2) { - QualType T = FD->getParamDecl(1)->getType(); - if (const IdentifierInfo *II = T.getBaseTypeIdentifier()) - return II->getName().equals("nothrow_t"); - } - - // Skip placement operators. - if (FD->getNumParams() != 1 || FD->isVariadic()) - return false; - - // One of the standard new/new[]/delete/delete[] non-placement operators. - return true; + // This is standard iff it's not defined in a user file. + SourceLocation L = FD->getLocation(); ---------------- Szelethus wrote: > typo: if https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_and_only_if Thx for pointing out that it's not an entirely common jargon! ================ Comment at: test/Analysis/NewDelete-custom.cpp:3-4 // RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,cplusplus.NewDelete,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks,unix.Malloc -std=c++11 -analyzer-config c++-allocator-inlining=false -DLEAKS=1 -fblocks -verify %s // RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,cplusplus.NewDelete,unix.Malloc -std=c++11 -DALLOCATOR_INLINING=1 -fblocks -verify %s // RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,cplusplus.NewDelete,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks,unix.Malloc -std=c++11 -DLEAKS=1 -DALLOCATOR_INLINING=1 -fblocks -verify %s #include "Inputs/system-header-simulator-cxx.h" ---------------- Szelethus wrote: > Do we still need `-DLEAKS=1` and ` -DALLOCATOR_INLINING=1`? I guess i'll just remove the no-leaks run-lines because they didn't make sense in the first place. https://reviews.llvm.org/D53543 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits