Szelethus added a comment.
Hmm, have you branched off of D71524 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71524>? If so,
this patch should definitely land first.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/GenericTaintChecker.cpp:165
/// Given a pointer argument, return the value it points to.
- static Optional<SVal> getPointedToSVal(CheckerContext &C, const Expr *Arg);
+ static Optional<SVal> getPointeeOf(CheckerContext &C, const Expr *Arg);
----------------
Nice!
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/GenericTaintChecker.cpp:385
+unsigned getNumArgs(const CallEvent &Call) {
+ return Call.getNumArgs() + static_cast<unsigned>(isa<CXXInstanceCall>(Call));
}
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> steakhal wrote:
> > I'm not sure why should we adjust (//workaround//) the number of arguments
> > of `CXXInstanceCall`s calls, can someone explain it to me?
> >
> > The same question raised for `getArg` too.
> Remove this :)
>
> I think this is about this inconsistency with operator calls where one of
> {decl, expr} treats `this` as an argument, but the other doesn't. `CallEvent`
> automatically accounts for that (see `getAdjustedParameterIndex()` and
> `getASTArgumentIndex()` as they're overridden in various sub-classes of
> `CallEvent`).
I have some thoughts about this here: D71524#1859435.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72035/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72035
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
