================
@@ -102,7 +105,36 @@ bool Sema::CheckCountedByAttrOnField(FieldDecl *FD, Expr
*E, bool CountInBytes,
// only `PointeeTy->isStructureTypeWithFlexibleArrayMember()` is reachable
// when `FieldTy->isArrayType()`.
bool ShouldWarn = false;
- if (PointeeTy->isIncompleteType() && !CountInBytes) {
+ if (PointeeTy->isAlwaysIncompleteType() && !CountInBytes) {
----------------
delcypher wrote:
It's not a silly question at all. This is not a model I explored in much depth.
One reason to not do it that way is that our current implementation requires
that "uses" of pointers annotated with `__counted_by` have a complete pointee
type at the "use" site because in some cases we represent bounds checks at the
AST level and IIRC the creation of the AST node that represents the bounds
check needs to know the pointee size.
This is a design decision that could (and probably should be) revisited at some
point but I don't think this is the right time to do it.
As noted in the PR description there is a case with tentative definitions that
isn't handled correctly right now and would require waiting until the end of
the translation unit to handle correctly. It's been omitted because it's not
something we've needed so we've simply not implemented it yet.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106321
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
