whisperity added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/MisplacedPointerArithmeticInAllocCheck.cpp:81-82 + diag(PtrArith->getBeginLoc(), + "pointer arithmetic is applied to the result of %0() instead of its " + "argument") + << Func->getName() << Hint; ---------------- baloghadamsoftware wrote: > whisperity wrote: > > If I put the `+ b` on `X` as in `malloc(X + b)` instead of `malloc(X) + b`, > > then it's not //pointer// arithmetic anymore, but (hopefully unsigned) > > arithmetic. Should the warning message really start with "pointer > > arithmetic"? > > > > Maybe you could consider the check saying > > > > arithmetic operation applied to pointer result of ...() instead of > > size-like argument > > > > optionally, I'd clarify it further by putting at the end: > > > > resulting in ignoring a prefix of the buffer. > > > > considering you specifically match on the std(-like) allocations. (At least > > for now.) > "resulting in ignoring a prefix of the buffer" <- this is only true for > addition. What should we write for subtraction? You are right about subtraction. I think this message is concise as is. 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
