gribozavr2 added a comment. In D71001#1768963 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71001#1768963>, @baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> In D71001#1768880 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71001#1768880>, @gribozavr2 > wrote: > > > Is this a common problem? There's a lot of silly code we could try to find, > > but if people don't actually write it, then we get all downsides of > > maintenance without the benefits of the checker. > > > Oh yes, all our checkers are developed upon user request. They only request > it if they find out their developers write such silly code. But how often is it? Is it just one case? > And this kind of bug is nasty to debug. (In case of addition less memory is > available behind the pointer while the memory ahead of it is lost. In case of > subtraction data before the pointer gets overwritten.) ASan can help debug this issue, and more. This check is quite limited. For example, if the addition is done in a separate statement, this check wouldn't catch the problem. ASan would. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71001/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71001 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
