Szelethus added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/UninitializedObjectChecker.cpp:681-689
+ Optional<nonloc::LazyCompoundVal> OtherObject =
+ getObjectVal(OtherCtor, Context);
+ if (!OtherObject)
+ continue;
+
+ // If the CurrentObject is a field of OtherObject, it will be analyzed
+ // during the analysis of OtherObject.
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Szelethus wrote:
> > NoQ wrote:
> > > Szelethus wrote:
> > > > NoQ wrote:
> > > > > It seems safer to look at `CXXConstructExpr::getConstructionKind()`.
> > > > >
> > > > > Taking a `LazyCompoundVal` and converting it back to a region is
> > > > > definitely a bad idea because the region within `LazyCompoundVal` is
> > > > > completely immaterial and carries no meaning for the value
> > > > > represented by this `SVal`; it's not necessarily the region you're
> > > > > looking for.
> > > > Looking at the singleton test case, I think I need to get that region
> > > > somehow, and I'm not too sure what you meant under using
> > > > `CXXConstructExpr::getConstructionKind()`. One thing I could do, is
> > > > similar to how `getObjectVal` works:
> > > > ```
> > > > Loc Tmp = Context.getSValBuilder().getCXXThis(OtherCtor->getParent(),
> > > >
> > > > Context.getStackFrame());
> > > >
> > > > auto OtherThis =
> > > > Context.getState()->getSVal(Tmp).castAs<loc::MemRegionVal>();
> > > >
> > > > OtherThis.getRegion(); // Hooray!
> > > > ```
> > > >
> > > > I have tested it, and it works wonders. Is this a "safe-to-use" region?
> > > You can directly ask `CXXConstructExpr` if it's a field or a base
> > > constructor. I could describe `getConstructionKind()` as some sort of
> > > very limited `ConstructionContext` that's available in the AST: it
> > > explains to you what sort of object is being constructed. I suspect it's
> > > enough for your purposes.
> > I think I'm aware of how it works, but my issue is that it's very limited:
> > ```
> > enum ConstructionKind { CK_Complete, CK_NonVirtualBase, CK_VirtualBase,
> > CK_Delegating }
> > ```
> > Sadly, whether the `CXXConstructExpr` was a field construction or a "top
> > level" (non-field) construction can't be retrieved from
> > `getConstructionKind()`, as I understand it.
> >
> > If I were to return true (say that the constructed object will be analyzed
> > later, thus ignoring it for now) if `getConstructionKind() == CK_Complete`,
> > the singleton testcase will fail (I have tested it). I'm very confident
> > that I need to obtain the constructed object's `MemRegion`.
> Whoops, yeah, i was wrong. I mis-remembered that there's a `CK_` for field.
>
> Then, yeah, the code looks good, let me recall where we were in terms of why
> do we need it><
"it" as if?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48436
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
