MTC added subscribers: teemperor, baloghadamsoftware, blitz.opensource. MTC added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: donat.nagy.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53024#1258976, @Szelethus wrote: > Also, a lot of items on this list is outdated, but I joined the project > relatively recently, so I'm not sure what's the state on all of them. AFAIK, the items below is outdated. - Enhance CFG to model C++ temporaries properly (This problem has basically been fixed by @NoQ.) - Enhance CFG to model C++ new more precisely (This problem has basically been fixed by @NoQ.) - Implement iterators invalidation checker (IIRC, @baloghadamsoftware has solved this, see `IteratorChecker.cpp`.) - Write checkers which catch Copy and Paste errors (IIRC, @teemperor has solved this, see `CloneChecker.cpp`) - Enhance CFG to model C++ delete more precisely (@blitz.opensource's focus is no longer on clang static analyzer, so we should not keep him as `current contact`.). And there are items, I'm not sure what the current state is. Like: - Explicitly model standard library functions with BodyFarm. (This item is marked as **ongoing**, it doesn't look very active nowadays.) If I'm wrong, @NoQ and @george.karpenkov, please correct me. In addition `2018 Bay Area LLVM Developers' Meetings` may bring some new open projects :), see http://llvm.org/devmtg/2018-10/talk-abstracts.html#bof6. At the end, there are some punctuation problems, yea, I browsed this page through the browser :). ================ Comment at: www/analyzer/open_projects.html:98 + efficient. For instance, if the function is pure, then a single bit of + information “this function is pure” would already be much better than + conservative evaluation, and sometimes good enough to make inlining not ---------------- `“this function is pure”` -> `"this function is pure"` ================ Comment at: www/analyzer/open_projects.html:100 + conservative evaluation, and sometimes good enough to make inlining not + worth the effort. Gathering such snippets of information - “partial + summaries" - automatically, from the more simple to the more complex ---------------- `“partial` -> `"partial` ================ Comment at: www/analyzer/open_projects.html:259 + <p>One of the more annoying parts in this is handling state splits for error + return values. A “Schrödinger state” technique that was first implemented in + the PthreadLockChecker (where a mutex was destroyed and not destroyed at the ---------------- Also here? `“Schrödinger state”` -> `"Schrödinger state"` ================ Comment at: www/analyzer/open_projects.html:267 + <li>Many alpha checks can be turned into opt-in lint-like checks + <p>Path-sensitive lint checks are interesting and they can’t be implemented + in clang-tidy and there’s clearly an interest in them, but we here aren’t ---------------- `can‘t` -> `can't` ================ Comment at: www/analyzer/open_projects.html:268 + <p>Path-sensitive lint checks are interesting and they can’t be implemented + in clang-tidy and there’s clearly an interest in them, but we here aren’t + having enough maintenance power to respond to bugs and false positives. If ---------------- `there‘s` -> `there's` `aren‘t` -> `aren't` Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D53024 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
