krememek added a comment. FWIW, I do think this is a great problem to work on. It is easy to come up with solutions that work for specific examples but fall over on general code. I completely agree that failing to analyzing code after the loop is a major hole and lost opportunity to find bugs, but fixing that should not be at a tradeoff of a huge influx in false positives. Some basic invalidation of values touched by the loop, which includes possibly invalidating checker state, will likely be necessary. I think this is what Anna was getting to in her comment.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12358 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
