================
@@ -635,6 +668,66 @@ void deque_emplace_back(std::deque<int> &D, int n) {
clang_analyzer_eval(clang_analyzer_iterator_validity(i2));
//expected-warning{{FALSE}}
}
+/// append_range()
+///
+/// - Design decision: extends containers to the ->RIGHT-> (i.e. the
+/// past-the-end position of the container is incremented).
+///
+/// - Iterator invalidation rules depend the container type.
+
+/// std::list-like containers: No iterators are invalidated.
+
+void list_append_range(std::list<int> &L, std::vector<int>& vec) {
+ auto i0 = L.cbegin(), i1 = --L.cend(), i2 = L.cend();
+
+ clang_analyzer_denote(clang_analyzer_container_begin(L), "$L.begin()");
+ clang_analyzer_denote(clang_analyzer_container_end(L), "$L.end()");
+
+ L.append_range(vec);
+
+ clang_analyzer_eval(clang_analyzer_iterator_validity(i0));
//expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(clang_analyzer_iterator_validity(i1));
//expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(clang_analyzer_iterator_validity(i2));
//expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ clang_analyzer_express(clang_analyzer_iterator_position(i0)); //
expected-warning-re {{$L.begin(){{$}}}}
+ clang_analyzer_express(clang_analyzer_iterator_position(i1)); //
expected-warning-re {{$L.end() - 1{{$}}}}
+ clang_analyzer_express(clang_analyzer_iterator_position(i2)); //
expected-warning-re {{$L.end(){{$}}}} FIXME: Should be $L.end() + 1
----------------
steakhal wrote:
Why should this be `$L.end() + 1`? `i2` was defined by `L.cend()`, so I think
the actual output is correct.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129719
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
