steakhal added a comment.
Herald added subscribers: ASDenysPetrov, martong, Charusso, dkrupp.
I'm not sure if this implementation is correct.
I'm expecting this checker code not to crash:
const auto *alloc = dyn_cast<CXXAllocatorCall>(&Call);
if (!alloc)
return;
const int NumImpArgs = alloc->getNumImplicitArgs();
errs() << "alloc->getNumImplicitArgs(): " << NumImpArgs << '\n'; // prints 1
for (int i = 0; i < NumImpArgs; ++i)
errs() << "> " << alloc->getPlacementArgExpr(i) << '\n'; // crash:
assertion violated
const int NumArgs = alloc->getNumArgs();
errs() << "alloc->getNumArgs(): " << NumArgs << '\n';
for (int i = NumImpArgs; i < NumArgs; ++i)
errs() << "> " << alloc->getArgExpr(i) << '\n';
Analyzed code:
void foo() {
int *p = new int;
}
Assertion:
clang: ../../clang/include/clang/AST/ExprCXX.h:2272: clang::Expr*
clang::CXXNewExpr::getPlacementArg(unsigned int): Assertion `(I <
getNumPlacementArgs()) && "Index out of range!"' failed.
---
I'm planning to improve the `MallocChecker` using `CallEvent`s directly,
instead of using the underlaying `CallExpr` or `CXXNewExpr` objects in
`MallocChecker::checkCXXNewOrCXXDelete`.
Am I misusing something? @NoQ
Repository:
rL LLVM
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52957/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52957
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
