OikawaKirie added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/issue-55019.cpp:13-14
+
+void *malloc(size_t);
+void free(void *);
+
----------------
> Ah, I see that it's for c function declarations. If that's the case, have you
> considered adding the malloc and free declarations to that header?
What about doing this in another patch and updating all test cases that use
malloc and free? Maybe other libc APIs as well?
The test case malloc-three-arg.c declares malloc and in a different signature
and also includes this header. Simply doing so in this patch will lead to other
conflicts.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/pr22954.c:581
clang_analyzer_eval(m27.s3[i] == 1); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}\
expected-warning{{Potential leak of memory pointed to by 'm27.s4'}}
return 0;
----------------
Do I need to update all other leak expectation directions in this file as well?
Such as this one here.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D152435/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D152435
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
