zaks.anna added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CheckerContext.h:244
@@ +243,3 @@
+ const ProgramPointTag *Tag = nullptr) {
+ return generateSink(State, /*Pred=*/nullptr,
+ (Tag ? Tag : Location.getTag()));
----------------
xazax.hun wrote:
> zaks.anna wrote:
> > Please, use a non-null Pred for clarity
> The following workflow is not supported by this API: a checker that generates
> multiple transition in the same callback (the generated nodes are added
> sequentially to the path), and one of the might be an error node.
>
> This also applies to generateNonFatalErrorNode.
>
> In case we would like to improve the documentation it might be useful to give
> some pointers to the users which when should an error node be considered as
> fatal.
- We could introduce another API that requires a Pred node.
- The workflow is supported right now by directly using addTransition API.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/FixedAddressChecker.cpp:53
@@ -52,3 +52,3 @@
- if (ExplodedNode *N = C.addTransition()) {
+ if (ExplodedNode *N = C.generateNonFatalErrorNode()) {
if (!BT)
----------------
jordan_rose wrote:
> zaks.anna wrote:
> > Can this ever fail? In some cases we just assume it won't in others we
> > tests..
> >
> > Maybe it only fails when we cache out?
> It does fail when we cache out, and I think we can still cache out if Pred
> has a different tag the second time around.
There some instances in this patch where we do not check if the returned node
is null. We should be consistent.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12780
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
