ilya marked 4 inline comments as done.
ilya added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:13384
case Stmt::MemberExprClass: {
expr = cast<MemberExpr>(expr)->getBase();
break;
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> ilya wrote:
> > rsmith wrote:
> > > Hmm, don't we need to do different things for dot and arrow in this case?
> > There are several test cases for an out of bounds access on an array member
> > using dot and arrow operators in array-bounds.cpp. Do you have a specific
> > test case for which you think the code is broken?
> > There are several test cases for an out of bounds access on an array member
> > using dot and arrow operators in array-bounds.cpp. Do you have a specific
> > test case for which you think the code is broken?
>
> Sure. There's a false negative for this:
>
> ```
> struct A { int n; };
> A *a[4];
> int *n = &a[4]->n;
> ```
>
> ... because we incorrectly visit the left-hand side of the `->` with
> `AllowOnePastEnd == 1`. The left-hand side of `->` is subject to
> lvalue-to-rvalue conversion, so can't be one-past-the-end regardless of the
> context in which the `->` appears.
> ... because we incorrectly visit the left-hand side of the -> with
> AllowOnePastEnd == 1. The left-hand side of -> is subject to lvalue-to-rvalue
> conversion, so can't be one-past-the-end regardless of the context in which
> the -> appears.
Thanks for clarifying. So basically we don't want to allow one-past-end for
MemberExpr?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71714/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71714
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
