steakhal added a comment.
I would like to discuss why don't we have a distinct checker managing the
bookkeeping stuff of the CString lengths.
I just want a clean understanding and wide consensus about this.
Personally, I would still prefer the original version of this patch (//+nits of
course//).
================
Comment at:
clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/CStringChecker/CStringChecker.cpp:32-34
+auto CStringChecker::createOutOfBoundErrorMsg(StringRef FunctionDescription,
+ AccessKind Access)
+ -> ErrorMessage {
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Why suddenly use arrow syntax here?
This way I could spare the full name of the class :D
I will use the qualified name instead.
================
Comment at:
clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/CStringChecker/CStringChecker.h:227
+#endif
\ No newline at end of file
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> No NeWlInE aT eNd Of FiLe
I'm wondering why did clang-format not add this - I'm really surprised. Thanks.
================
Comment at:
clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/CStringChecker/CStringLengthModeling.cpp:309
+
+// TODO: Is it useful?
+void CStringChecker::printState(raw_ostream &Out, ProgramStateRef State,
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Yes it is. It gets invoked during exploded graph dumps and it's an invaluable
> debugging facility.
A strange observation to note here.
In the implementation of the dump method, I use the provided `NL` and `Sep`
parameters.
However, in the `checker_messages` of a State dump, `Sep` seem to be
substituted with the empty string.
For example [[
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/86e1b73507f3738f10eefb580d7c5e9adf17c6c0/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Taint.cpp#L37
| taint::printTaint ]] just ignore the `Sep` parameter to //possibly//
workaround this issue.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
