serge-sans-paille added a comment.
@kees are you ok with current state?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExpr.cpp:906
// member, only a T[0] or T[] member gets that treatment.
+ // Under StrictFlexArraysLevel, obey c99+ that disallows FAM in union,
see
+ // C11 6.7.2.1 ยง18
----------------
jyknight wrote:
> I believe this bit is incorrect -- it should just go back to 'return true;'.
> The StrictFlexArraysLevel check above already eliminates the cases we want to
> eliminate (size==1 in strictness-level 2.)
Well, if we are in strictness-level 2, with an undefined size or size = 0, we
can still reach that path, and don't want to return 'true' because FAM in union
are in invalid per the standard.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/MemRegion.cpp:792
+ if (getContext().getLangOpts().StrictFlexArrays >= 2)
+ return false;
----------------
jyknight wrote:
> Yuk, another place that is weird and doesn't handle StrictFlexArrays as
> expected...
I've been able to slightly move that check below, without impacting test suite.
Also added a FIXME because
`Opts.ShouldConsiderSingleElementArraysAsFlexibleArrayMembers` looks redundant
with `-fstrict-flex-arrays`
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D126864/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D126864
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
