Szelethus added a comment.
It would be great to see a test about properly setting the arrays extent.
Otherwise LGTM.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:61
+ // warned about that already.
+ // FIXME: report bug?
+ if (SizeV.isUnknown())
----------------
Hmm, why would we? The size is most probably unknown to us.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:162-172
+ const VariableArrayType *VLALast = nullptr;
+ while (VLA) {
+ const Expr *SizeE = VLA->getSizeExpr();
+ State = checkVLASize(C, State, SizeE);
+ if (!State)
+ return;
+ SizeExpr.push_back(SizeE);
----------------
Ahaa, so if we have a `vla[x][y][a][b]` variable, `VLALast` would be `vla[x]`,
which allows you to get the actual element type. Could you explain that (maybe
even with a small example like this) in the code?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:194-196
+ // Binary operation not created, return with the current state set.
+ C.addTransition(State);
return;
----------------
How about
```
We were not able to determine extent of the array, return with the original
state.
```
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77305/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77305
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
