NoQ added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StdLibraryFunctionsChecker.cpp:409
- Optional<Summary> FoundSummary = findFunctionSummary(FD, CE, C);
+ for (const ValueConstraintPtr& VC : Summary.ArgConstraints) {
+ ProgramStateRef SuccessSt = VC->apply(State, Call, Summary);
----------------
martong wrote:
> NoQ wrote:
> > Maybe we should add an assertion that the same argument isn't specified
> > multiple times.
> I think there could be cases when we want to have e.g. a not-null constraint
> on the 1st argument, but also we want to express that the 1st argument's size
> is described by the 2nd argument. I am planning to implement such a
> constraints in the future. In that case we would have two constraints on the
> 1st argument and the assert would fire.
Wait, i misunderstood the code. It's even worse than that: you're adding
transitions in a loop, so it'll cause state splits for every constraint.
Because you do not intend to create multiple branches here, there needs to be
exactly one `addTransition` performed every time `checkPreCall` is called.
I.e., for now this code is breaking everything whenever there's more than one
constraint, regardless of whether it's on the same argument.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D73898/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D73898
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
