NoQ added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:130-131
+ // At least check for zero again.
+ // Assume that this is a more exact fact than the previous assumptions
+ // (in checkVLAIndexSize), so report error too.
+ reportBug(VLA_Zero, SizeE, State, C);
----------------
Why not do the same in `checkVLAIndexSize` then?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:182-183
- SVal LessThanZeroVal = SVB.evalBinOp(State, BO_LT, SizeD, Zero, SizeTy);
- if (Optional<DefinedSVal> LessThanZeroDVal =
- LessThanZeroVal.getAs<DefinedSVal>()) {
- ConstraintManager &CM = C.getConstraintManager();
- ProgramStateRef StatePos, StateNeg;
+ // Check if the size is zero or negative.
+ SVal PositiveVal = SVB.evalBinOp(State, BO_GT, SizeD, Zero, SizeTy);
+ if (Optional<DefinedSVal> PositiveDVal = PositiveVal.getAs<DefinedSVal>()) {
----------------
The type of binary operator `>=` is `bool`, not `size_t`.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81061/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81061
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
