On 12/07/2017 02:14 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/29/2017 04:36 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I've finished reimplementing the patch as a standalone pass.
In the attached revision I also addressed your comments below
as well as Richard's to allowing the strlen optimizations even
for overlapping accesses.
While beefing up the tests I found a few minor issues that
I also fixed (false negatives).
The fallout wasn't quite as bad as I thought, mainly thanks
to the narrow API for the checker.
So still reading though this, but wanted to start with a question I hope
you can answer quickly.
In terms of coverage -- did we lose much in terms of cases that were
diagnosed in the original version, but aren't in this version?
I'm quite pleased to say that with the pass in the right place
(after vrp) the coverage is the same.
Martin
