xazax.hun added a comment.
One last question: maybe we want to skip this kind of simplification in case of
Z3?
Probably the constraint managers could have a flag like
"wantsSimplifiedConstraints"?
Maybe somehow the checkers that are doing their own simplification could
respect this flag as well
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:975
+ if (Op->getOpcode() == UO_AddrOf)
+if (Op->getSubExpr()->isLValue()) {
+ Ex = Op->getSubExpr()->IgnoreParenCasts();
Maybe you could move this
xazax.hun added a comment.
It is not supported to run the analyzer with some of the core checkers turned
off. Maybe we should change the behavior such that turning off core checkers
turn off the warnings from those checkers but not the checkers themselves?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28765
__
xazax.hun added a comment.
You might want to give CodeChecker [1] a try as a workaround. It stores the
results in a more compact format and you can do filtering.
[1] https://github.com/Ericsson/codechecker
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28765
___
cfe-c
xazax.hun added a comment.
Great find! Could you transform your examole into a testcasr that fails before
this patch? I think there should be already some tests for call graphs that
you can take a look at.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29183
___
cfe-
xazax.hun created this revision.
Right now CStringSytanxChecker assumes that the argument of a sizeof expression
is an expression. The argument can also be a type. In this case an assertion
fail will be triggered when the SubExpression is being queried. I fixed this
issue and did other minor cl
xazax.hun added a comment.
Benedek, do you have time to address the review comments or do you want me to
commandeer this revision?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23421
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http:/
xazax.hun added a comment.
Hi Benedek, could you do the merge or should anybody commandeer these revisions?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23423
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/
xazax.hun added a comment.
I think this might be better as a readability checker to find misleading
variable or parameter names.
It would also be great to consider types. Unfortunately it probably means
reimplementing some of the logic from Sema, since that information is not
available at this
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 104111.
xazax.hun marked 5 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: JDevlieghere.
- Updates according to the reviews.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34449
Files:
clang-tidy/misc/DefinitionsInHeadersCheck.cpp
test/clang
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34506#791089, @akyrtzi wrote:
> Comparing SourceLocations from different translation units is not meaningful
> and my concern is that treating source locations like this can very easily
> lead to errors where by mistake the code is resolvi
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 104167.
xazax.hun retitled this revision from "Relax an assert in the comparison of
source locations" to "Factor out a functionality from
`isBeforeInTranslationUnit`".
xazax.hun edited the summary of this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- New approach
xazax.hun added a comment.
I created a new public API that is using a piece of code that was factored out
from `isBeforeInTranslationUnit`. Using this new function it is possible to
implement proper comparison of source locations within the Static Analyzer.
What do you think?
https://reviews.
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 104358.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Removed the whitespace changes
- Factored out one more condition
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34506
Files:
include/clang/Basic/SourceManager.h
lib/Basic/SourceManager.cpp
Index: lib/Basic/SourceManager.cpp
==
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34506#792313, @akyrtzi wrote:
> I'd prefer to avoid including whitespace-only changes (there are a couple of
> lines in the diff with only whitespace change), otherwise LGTM!
Great, thank you! If no one has objections I will commit this t
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 104360.
xazax.hun marked 2 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun retitled this revision from "[clang-tidy] Enable constexpr
definitions in headers. " to "[clang-tidy] Enable inline variable definitions
in headers. ".
xazax.hun edited the summary of this revisi
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 104379.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Unbreak the constexpr test.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34449
Files:
clang-tidy/misc/DefinitionsInHeadersCheck.cpp
docs/clang-tidy/checks/misc-definitions-in-headers.rst
test/clang-tidy/misc-definitions-in-headers-
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/misc-definitions-in-headers.hpp:1
-// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s misc-definitions-in-headers %t
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s misc-definitions-in-headers %t -- -- -std=c++1z
hokein wrote:
> hokein wrot
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VirtualCallChecker.cpp:31
+class VirtualCallChecker: public Checker {
+ mutable std::unique_ptr BT_CT;
+ mutable std::unique_ptr BT_DT;
Could you find more descriptive names for these BugT
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 104848.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Updated to compile with trunk
- Minor style fixes
- Proper diagnostic when the index format is wrong
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512
Files:
include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticFrontendKinds.td
include/clang/Tooling/Cross
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 105053.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Patch scan-build instead of using custom scripts
- Rebase patch based on the proposed LibTooling CTU code
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
include/clang/Sta
xazax.hun added a comment.
It looks like Richard approved libTooling as a dependency for clang on the
mailing list (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017-July/054536.html).
If it is ok to have this code in libTooling (for now), I think we could
start/continue the review of this patch.
h
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512#800499, @klimek wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512#800490, @xazax.hun wrote:
>
> > It looks like Richard approved libTooling as a dependency for clang on the
> > mailing list
> > (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 105409.
xazax.hun retitled this revision from "[libTooling] Add preliminary Cross
Translation Unit support for libTooling" to "Add preliminary Cross Translation
Unit support library".
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Move CrossTU functionality into its own lib
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512#800618, @klimek wrote:
> +Richard as top-level code owner for new libs.
>
> For bikeshedding the name: I'd have liked libIndex, but that's already taken.
> CrossTU doesn't seem too bad to me, too, though.
Some brainstorming for the
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 105412.
xazax.hun marked an inline comment as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Fix a copy and paste error and removed an unintended change.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512
Files:
include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticFrontendKinds.td
include/clang/CrossTU/C
xazax.hun added a comment.
You are making a pretty good progress!
I think right now there is some code duplication that could be reduced, but
otherwise, the checker starts to look really good.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VirtualCallChecker.cpp:43
+private:
+ bool
xazax.hun added a comment.
gentle ping
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
xazax.hun added a comment.
Are you sure this works as intended when e.g.: `$a+2==$b*3`
So on one of the sides, the ops are not additive?
I would like to see some test cases for that.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleSValBuilder.cpp:572
+ lInt = &lSymIntExp
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RangeConstraintManager.cpp:500
+ // If the type of A - B is the same as the type of A, then use the type
of
+ // B as the type of B - A. Otherwise keep the type of A - B.
+ SymbolRef negSym = Sym
xazax.hun added a comment.
At this point, I am a bit wondering about two questions.
- When should something belong to a checker and when should something belong to
the engine? Sometimes we model library aspects in the engine and model language
constructs in checkers.
- What is the checker progr
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34512#803724, @klimek wrote:
> Specifically, ping Richard for new top-level lib in clang.
Richard proposed pulling this out into a separate library in the first place.
Do we need his approval for the name? Or we want him to consider if th
xazax.hun added a comment.
Thank you! I think we can start to run this check on real world code bases and
evaluate the results.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VirtualCallChecker.cpp:41
+ void checkPreCall(const CallEvent &Call, CheckerContext &C) const;
+ void Chang
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VirtualCallChecker.cpp:72
+REGISTER_MAP_WITH_PROGRAMSTATE(CtorMap, const MemRegion *, bool)
+REGISTER_MAP_WITH_PROGRAMSTATE(DtorMap, const MemRegion *, bool)
+
I was wondering if there is an
xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
One minor nit, otherwise looks good to me.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp:
+})) {
+ // Throw-expressions are currently generating sinks during symbolic
+ // execution: they'r
xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added reviewers: dcoughlin, NoQ, a.sidorin.
xazax.hun added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks good to me. Did you run it on a codebase to check the results?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33672
xazax.hun added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
xazax.hun added a comment.
Aaron, could you comment on the applicability of this check to C? Thanks in
advance.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33672
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http:
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-static-accessed-through-instance.cpp:34
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: static member accessed through
instance [readability-static-accessed-through-instance]
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^}} C::x;
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp:418-423
SourceLocation XDL = XD->getLocation();
SourceLocation YDL = YD->getLocation();
if (XDL != YDL) {
const SourceManager &SM = XL.getManager();
- return SM.isBe
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp:418-423
SourceLocation XDL = XD->getLocation();
SourceLocation YDL = YD->getLocation();
if (XDL != YDL) {
const SourceManager &SM = XL.getManager();
- return SM.isBe
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 129509.
xazax.hun marked 5 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Fixed review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/ExprEngin
xazax.hun added a comment.
This should be rebased to latest master.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38845
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
xazax.hun created this revision.
xazax.hun added reviewers: a.sidorin, szepet.
Herald added subscribers: dkrupp, rnkovacs.
Also fix a problem with CXXTemporaryObjectExpr.
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42335
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 130961.
xazax.hun marked 2 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Address review comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42335
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
Index: unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
==
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42335#983878, @a.sidorin wrote:
> Hello Peter,
>
> Thank you for the patch! It is almost LGTM, just a few minor questions inline.
> Am I understand correctly that it is partially based on
> https://github.com/haoNoQ/clang/blob/summary-ipa-
xazax.hun added a comment.
High level note: `clang::TypeAliasDecl` has the same issue as `CXXRecordDecl`,
so templated versions should not be added to the DeclContext. Could you add
that just for the sake of completeness?
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42301
_
xazax.hun added a comment.
I do not see a test for the following changes:
- ASTImporter: don't add templated declarations into DeclContext
- ASTImporter: proper set ParmVarDecls for imported FunctionProtoTypeLoc
Comment at: lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp:2085
+ case FunctionDecl::TK
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42301#984713, @a.sidorin wrote:
> > I do not see a test for the following changes:
> >
> > - ASTImporter: don't add templated declarations into DeclContext
>
> It's in ASTImporterTest. It checks that the templated decl cannot be found in
>
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 131059.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Added import for CXXTypeidExpr. What is the best way to test this?
header is required for using the typeid operator, but relying on the
presence of an STL library in tests is usually considered as a bad practice.
Sho
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 131065.
xazax.hun retitled this revision from "[ASTImporter] Supporting
CXXOperatorCallExpr, SizeOfPackExpr, DependentTemplateSpecializationType,
DependentSizedArray importing." to "[ASTImporter] Supporting
CXXOperatorCallExpr, SizeOfPackExpr, DependentTem
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42301#986583, @a.sidorin wrote:
> I'd rather create a separate patch - this one is already large enough. Is it
> OK?
Yeah, that is fine by me.
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42301
__
xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Overall looks good! Thanks for working on this!
Comment at: lib/AST/ExternalASTMerger.cpp:403
+ASTImporter *Importer = C.second;
+NamedDecl *ND = cast(Importer-
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 131406.
xazax.hun marked 2 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Address review comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42335
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
Index: unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
==
hgabii created this revision.
hgabii added a reviewer: clang-tools-extra.
hgabii added a project: clang-tools-extra.
Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, hintonda, mgorny, srhines.
Add misc-io-functions-misused checker to warns for cases when the return value
of certain standard iostream C func
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h:153
+
+ ConstructionContext() = default;
+ ConstructionContext(CXXConstructExpr *Constructor, Stmt *Trigger)
Maybe I am getting this wrong, but I think in this case the members will be
d
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D15227#674278, @zaks.anna wrote:
> @xazax.hun,
>
> Can we move this out of alpha?
>
> Have this checkers been tested on a large codebase? What are false positive
> rates?
I have tested it on a few ~200k LOC C codebase and I did not see any
xazax.hun added a comment.
Shouldn't this be a path sensitive check within the clang static analyzer
instead? So branches are properly handled and interprocedural analysis is done.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29839
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-co
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D29839#674307, @Prazek wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D29839#674301, @xazax.hun wrote:
>
> > Shouldn't this be a path sensitive check within the clang static analyzer
> > instead? So branches are properly handled and interprocedural an
xazax.hun created this revision.
During the review of https://reviews.llvm.org/D29567 it turned out the caching
in CallDescription is not implemented properly. In case an identifier does not
exist in a translation unit, repeated identifier lookups will be done which
might have bad impact on the
xazax.hun abandoned this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
For the first case ToT clang compiler gives a warning (-Wstring-compare), for
the second case, it generates a compiler error (error: ordered comparison
between pointer and zero). Note that, older versions of clang did not even give
a
xazax.hun abandoned this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
-Wtautological-pointer-compare already covers this case.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23423
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.o
xazax.hun commandeered this revision.
xazax.hun edited reviewers, added: Pajesz; removed: xazax.hun.
xazax.hun added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
The original author is no longer available.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D19586
___
cfe-co
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 88182.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Updated to latest trunk.
- Mentioned check in the release notes.
- Documented the limitation that tabs and spaces need to be consistent for this
check to work.
- Fixed (hopefully all) review comments.
- Fixed the test cas
xazax.hun marked 13 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisleadingIndentationCheck.cpp:20
+
+void MisleadingIndentationCheck::danglingElseCheck(
+const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result) {
danielmarjamak
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 88330.
xazax.hun marked 7 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Added a note to make it easier to understand the diagnostics.
- Reworded the error message about dangling else.
- Fixed other review comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D19586
xazax.hun added a comment.
Thank you for the review!
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisleadingIndentationCheck.cpp:79
+ Finder->addMatcher(
+ compoundStmt(anyOf(has(ifStmt()), has(forStmt()), has(whileStmt(
+ .bind("compound"),
alexfh wro
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 88333.
xazax.hun marked 9 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Updated to latest trunk.
- The cert rule was renamed, the patch is updated accordingly.
- Fixes as per review comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23421
Files:
clang-tidy/cer
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisleadingIndentationCheck.cpp:79
+ Finder->addMatcher(
+ compoundStmt(anyOf(has(ifStmt()), has(forStmt()), has(whileStmt(
+ .bind("compound"),
alexfh wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 88506.
xazax.hun marked 3 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun retitled this revision from "[Clang-tidy] CERT-MSC53-CPP (checker for
std namespace modification)" to "[Clang-tidy] CERT-DCL58-CPP (checker for std
namespace modification)".
xazax.hun edited the s
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 88541.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Do not warn for function specializations within the std namespace.
- Add a test case for swap.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23421
Files:
clang-tidy/cert/CERTTidyModule.cpp
clang-tidy/cert/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/ce
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D29884#677387, @NoQ wrote:
> Yep, seems that somebody has missed these issues :)
>
> I guess there's no way to test the operator case, because nobody made a
> CallDescription with an empty name for us (maybe we should even assert that).
Th
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CallEvent.h:73
+ : II(nullptr), IsLookupDone(false), FuncName(FuncName),
+RequiredArgs(RequiredArgs) {}
NoQ wrote:
> Maybe `assert(FuncName.size
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D6550#663002, @a.sidorin wrote:
> Hi Gabor. One of the bugs fixed in this patch is still present in master,
> other two are already fixed.
Thanks for checking that! Do you think it is ok for me to commit the missing
part?
https://review
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D6549#662955, @a.sidorin wrote:
> This should be fixed in r269693.
Indeed, I commandeer than abandon this revision so it is closed.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D6549
___
cfe-commits mailing list
xazax.hun created this revision.
This patch makes the valist check more robust to the different kind of ASTs
that are generated on different platforms:
Generated on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu:
|-TypedefDecl 0x1d07a40 <> implicit
__builtin_ms_va_list 'char *'
| `-PointerType 0x1d07a00 'char *'
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D15227#681127, @zaks.anna wrote:
> > But as far as I remember, this produced false negatives in the tests not
> > false positives.
>
> Could you double check that? Maybe you still have some notes in your mail box
> or just by looking at t
xazax.hun added a comment.
Nice check! Thank you for working on this!
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:30
+" The old user defined 'RandomFunction' is not usable for 'shuffle'. You "
+"need to "
+"make additional changes if you want a sp
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:30
+" The old user defined 'RandomFunction' is not usable for 'shuffle'. You "
+"need to "
+"make additional changes if you want a specific random function.";
-
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:81
+ Stream << "shuffle(";
+ FirstArgument->printPretty(Stream, nullptr, Ctx.getPrintingPolicy());
+ Stream << ", ";
madsravn wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
> > madsravn
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 89185.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Address some review comments.
- Add some additional tests.
- Fixed some false positives (checking for symbolic values for va_copy and more
robust detection of which valist model is used by the platform)
- I have run the c
xazax.hun marked 3 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ValistChecker.cpp:178
+VaListModelledAsArray = Cast->getCastKind() == CK_ArrayToPointerDecay;
+ const MemRegion *Reg = SV.getAsRegion();
+ if (const auto *De
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 89187.
xazax.hun marked 3 inline comments as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Fixed a comment.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30157
Files:
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ValistChecker.cpp
test/Analysis/valist-uninitialized-no-undef.c
test/Analysis/valist-
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: test/Analysis/valist-uninitialized-no-undef.c:19
+ // FIXME: There should be no warning for this.
+ (void)va_arg(*fst, int); // expected-warning{{va_arg() is called on an
uninitialized va_list}} expected-note{{va_arg() is called on
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 89780.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Minor style improvement.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30157
Files:
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ValistChecker.cpp
test/Analysis/valist-uninitialized-no-undef.c
test/Analysis/valist-uninitialized.c
test/Analysis/vali
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 89857.
xazax.hun edited the summary of this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Move the check out of alpha.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30157
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Checkers.td
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ValistChecker.cpp
te
xazax.hun added a comment.
There is an alternative approach idea:
This is not found by ArrayBoundCheckerV2? If no, an alternative approach would
be to properly set the constraints on the extent of the VLA's memory region.
After that, maybe ArrayBoundCheckerV2 would work automatically on this ca
xazax.hun added a comment.
In the meantime CheckBeginFunction has been implemented separately. I think you
should "abandon" this revision so it is shown as closed.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D15090
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.
xazax.hun updated this revision to Diff 90676.
xazax.hun marked an inline comment as done.
xazax.hun added a comment.
- Improve the readability of test files.
- Rebased on latest ToT.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30157
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Checkers.td
lib/StaticAnalyzer
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30157#689374, @danielmarjamaki wrote:
> I am running this checker right now on various projects. Here are currently
> seen results.. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BykPmWrCOxt2STZMOXZ5OGlwM3c
>
> Feel free to look at it and see if there
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/modernize-use-nullptr.cpp:252
+ public:
+ explicit TemplateClass(int a, T default_value = 0) {}
+};
It might be great to have a test case for:
```
template
class TemplateClass {
public:
explicit T
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/modernize-use-nullptr.cpp:254
+
+ void h(T *default_value = 0) {}
+
Great! Thanks for adding this test. I have the impression we do want to warn
and fix this case however. What do you think?
https:/
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/modernize-use-nullptr.cpp:254
+
+ void h(T *default_value = 0) {}
+
Maybe as a separate patch, but I think it might be worth to warn here. WDYT?
(Sorry for the double post, th
xazax.hun created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
This patch adds support for naive cross translational unit analysis.
The aim of this patch is to be minimal to enable the development of the feature
on the top of tree. This patch should be an NFC in case XTUDir is not provided
xazax.hun added a comment.
Guide to run the two pass analysis:
Process
---
These are the steps of XTU analysis:
1. `xtu-build.py` script uses your compilation database and extracts all
necessary information from files compiled. It puts all its generated data into
a folder (.xtu by default
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30798#697115, @zaks.anna wrote:
> I've committed the change, but would very much appreciate community feedback
> here if if there is any!
I agree with the change. Users are usually not interested in the results from
the standard library,
xazax.hun added a comment.
Functionally LGTM!
Note that while the traversal of AST Matchers are not defined in general, in
this particular case of chained ifs, it is guaranteed that parent nodes will be
matched before the child nodes. For this reason I think it is ok to have a
state like this.
xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30841#698634, @fgross wrote:
> I just assumed it would traverse in the "right" way, is there any
> documentation about AST / matcher traversal?
I do not kn
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/MiscTidyModule.cpp:70
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"misc-forwarding-reference-overload");
CheckFactories.registerCheck("misc-misplaced-const");
malcolm.parsons wrote:
> aaron.ballman
xazax.hun added a comment.
Also, maybe the readability module would be a better place for this check.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30896
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailma
xazax.hun added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Format/Encoding.h:136
+ }
+ while (Left + 1 < Right) {
+assert(ComputeWidth(Left) <= Width && "binary search left invariant");
Was just skimming through this patch. What is the reason to use a hand written
a
1201 - 1300 of 1413 matches
Mail list logo
