================
@@ -215,6 +215,18 @@ void Sema::inferGslOwnerPointerAttribute(CXXRecordDecl
*Record) {
inferGslPointerAttribute(Record, Record);
}
+void Sema::inferNullableClassAttribute(CXXRecordDecl *CRD) {
+ static llvm::StringSet<> Nullable{
+ "auto_ptr", "shared_ptr", "unique_ptr", "exception_ptr",
----------------
sam-mccall wrote:
I don't think our nullability concept is a good match for weak pointers - they
don't behave like other pointers.
If a managed object is shared across threads, then the nullable/non-null
distinction isn't useful. Allowing it to be used in contracts is probably
harmful (attractive nuisance & breaks analyses that treat nullable objects
generically). Since pointers may become null at any point without running any
code, implementations should always treat them as nullable, generic static
analysis gives incorrect results, and dynamic checks are racy. Threads are
involved reasonably often and it's not locally possible to tell.
In the absence of threads, `weak_ptr<T>`s that must not be null should almost
always be `shared_ptr<T> _Nonnull` instead, and probably are. (This isn't a
strong objection: `T* _Nonnull` is useful despite `T&` existing - but raw
pointers are *way* more common than weak ones).
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82705
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
