| Issue |
147056
|
| Summary |
clang-tidy: cppcoreguidelines-owning-memory doesn't flag double owning
|
| Labels |
clang-tidy
|
| Assignees |
|
| Reporter |
denzor200
|
```
gsl::owner<int*> Owner1 = new int(42);
gsl::owner<int*> Owner2 = Owner1;
// Owner1 = nullptr;
```
This may lead to double free because following the core guidelines rules we must call `delete Owner1;` and `delete Owner2;` later.
Another interesting double owning case is regarding move constructors and move assignments:
```
class Foo {
gsl::owner<int*> ptr=nullptr;
public:
~Foo() {
delete ptr;
}
Foo(Foo&& r) : ptr(r.ptr) {
// r.ptr = nullptr;
}
Foo& operator=(Foo&& r) {
if (&r != this) {
ptr = r.ptr;
// r.ptr = nullptr;
}
return *this;
}
};
```
In practice, such kind of wrong code mostly reached due to the fact that people expect `std::move` to set it's pointer argument to `nullptr` but it never do that:
```
Foo(Foo&& r) : ptr(std::move(r.ptr)) { // BAD
}
Foo& operator=(Foo&& r) {
if (&r != this) {
ptr = std::move(r.ptr); // BAD
}
return *this;
}
```
![]()
_______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
