NagyDonat wrote:

> Thank you very much for the detailed and thorough answer and guidance. 
> Initially, I considered performing parameter checks within evalStrcmpCommon. 
> However, since I'm not very familiar with static analyzers, I wasn't sure how 
> entering evalStrcmpCommon might affect the logic handling int strcmp(const 
> char *, char), so I implemented it this way.
> I will move the implementation to handle it after entering evalStrcmpCommon 
> as you suggested, but I would appreciate gaining a better understanding of 
> this related concept.

I don't see what you mean under "entering evalStrcmpCommon might affect the 
logic handling `int strcmp(const char *, char)`". As you can see in the method 
`evalCall()` -- which is implemented directly below `identifyCall` -- the 
callback is executed practically immediately when `identifyCall` finds it, so 
there is no relevant difference between placing your code at the end of 
`identifyCall` and placing it at the beginning of the callback.

--------

Also, please disclose if you are using AI to generate code and/or answer 
comments here. AI use is allowed on this project (in fact I accepted PRs by 
@steakhal where he used it) but contributors must follow the [AI Tool Use 
Policy](https://llvm.org/docs/AIToolPolicy.html) and e.g. disclose significant 
use of AI tools.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/180544
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to