Szelethus marked 5 inline comments as done.
Szelethus added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/UninitializedObject/UninitializedObject.h:259
+ return T->isBuiltinType() || T->isEnumeralType() ||
+ T->isMemberPointerType() || T->isBlockPointerType();
+}
----------------
I'm not sure this is correct -- do block pointers belong here? Since their
region is not `TypedValueRegion`, I though they better fit here.
================
Comment at:
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/UninitializedObject/UninitializedObject.h:261-265
+inline bool isLocType(const QualType &T) {
+ return T->isAnyPointerType() || T->isReferenceType() ||
+ T->isBlockPointerType();
+}
+
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> We have a fancy static `Loc::isLocType()`.
Oh, good to know! However, it also returns true for `nullptr_t`, which also
happens to be a `BuiltinType`. I'd like to keep `isPrimitiveType` and (the now
renamed) `isDereferencableType` categories disjunctive. Primitive types require
no further analysis other then checking whether they are initialized or not,
which is true for `nullptr_t` objects.
================
Comment at:
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/UninitializedObject/UninitializedPointee.cpp:240-244
+ if (Tmp->getRegion()->getSymbolicBase())
return None;
- }
- V = State->getSVal(*Tmp, DynT);
+ DynT = DynT->getPointeeType();
+ R = Tmp->getRegionAs<TypedValueRegion>();
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> This code seems to be duplicated with the "0th iteration" before the loop. I
> guess you can put everything into the loop.
I moved some code into the loop, but I think that I really need a 0th iteration
to make the code readable.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D51057
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
