martong added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleSValBuilder.cpp:1144
+ : (SVal)SVB.makeIntVal(*Const);
+ return SVal();
+ }
----------------
steakhal wrote:
> Let's be explicit about it.
Good point.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleSValBuilder.cpp:1148-1151
+ SVal Ret = getConst(Sym);
+ if (Ret.isUndef())
+ Ret = Visit(Sym);
+ return Ret;
----------------
steakhal wrote:
>
Makes sense.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/svalbuilder-simplify-compound-svals.cpp:23
+ x = y = z = 1;
+ return 0;
+}
----------------
steakhal wrote:
> It feels odd that in some of your examples you return some value, but in the
> rest, you don't.
yep, I agree, updated.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/svalbuilder-simplify-compound-svals.cpp:32
+ clang_analyzer_eval(x + y * z == 0); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(y * z == 0); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(x == 0); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
----------------
steakhal wrote:
> You could additionally assert that `y == 0` and `z == 0`.
`y * z == 0` does not imply that both `y` and `z` are `0`. However, we could
expect that one of them is `0`, but currently we don't have such a deduction
(this might be done in `ConstraintAssignor` in an independent patch).
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/svalbuilder-simplify-compound-svals.cpp:50
+void test_SymInt_constrained(int x, int y, int z) {
+ if (x * y * z != 4)
+ return;
----------------
steakhal wrote:
> What if `z` were in the middle? Would it still pass?
No, that would not pass. This is because we do not handle commutativity, for
that we should have a canonical form of the symbol trees (check out point 3
here https://reviews.llvm.org/D102696#2784624).
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/svalbuilder-simplify-compound-svals.cpp:65
+ x = 77 / (y + z);
+ if (y + z != 1)
+ return;
----------------
steakhal wrote:
> Would the test pass if you were using `z + y != 1` here?
No, because we do not handle commutativity.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103317/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103317
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
