xazax.hun added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/NullPtrInterferenceChecker.cpp:166
+/// child is a sink node.
+static bool unconditionallyLeadsHere(const ExplodedNode *N) {
+ size_t NonSinkNodeCount = llvm::count_if(
----------------
Consider the following code snippet:
```
void f(int *p, bool b)
{
if (b) {
*p = 4;
}
if (p) {
...
}
}
```
I suspect that we would get a warning for the code above. I think warning on
the code above might be reasonable (the values of `b` and `p` might be
correlated but in some cases the analyzer has no way to know this, probably
some assertions could make the code clearer in that case).
My problem is with the wording of the error message.
The warning `Pointer is unconditionally non-null here` on the null check is not
true for the code above.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D120992/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D120992
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
