balazske added a comment. In D72705#2213300 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72705#2213300>, @whisperity wrote:
> In D72705#2210255 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72705#2210255>, @balazske wrote: > >> More results in CodeChecker: emacs_errorreturn >> <https://codechecker-demo.eastus.cloudapp.azure.com/Default/reports?run=emacs_errorreturn&review-status=Unreviewed&review-status=Confirmed%20bug&detection-status=New&detection-status=Reopened&detection-status=Unresolved> > > Something's not quite right, e.g. at > https://codechecker-demo.eastus.cloudapp.azure.com/Default/report-detail?run=emacs_errorreturn&review-status=Unreviewed&review-status=Confirmed%20bug&detection-status=New&detection-status=Reopened&detection-status=Unresolved&report-id=7258 > there's a bug path element `Function '???' called [...]`. This seems to be > the case for almost every report... but I found no indication where this > "???" could come from, in the patch... Because that is an improved version of the checker. The current form is not testable because it detects too less functions. To have more results functions were added that may return NULL on error and a missing comparison to NULL is detected (similar as missing comparison to `EOF` in this patch). (To have the check for NULL some other improvements were made.) The '???' is part of development of note tags, the name of the called function is to be placed there (probably there is better way of doing these reports). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72705/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72705 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
