ymandel added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang/unittests/Analysis/FlowSensitive/ChromiumCheckModelTest.cpp:122
+ void transfer(const Stmt *S, NoopLattice &, Environment &Env) {
+ M.transfer(S, Env);
+ }
----------------
xazax.hun wrote:
> ymandel wrote:
> > xazax.hun wrote:
> > > I wonder whether the models should actually be called by the framework at
> > > some point.
> > > E.g. imagine the following scenario:
> > > ```
> > > void f()
> > > {
> > > std::optional<int> o(5);
> > > if (o)
> > > {
> > > // dead code here;
> > > }
> > > }
> > > ```
> > >
> > > In an ideal case, an analysis could use the `std::optional` modeling to
> > > realize that the code in the `if` statement is dead and use this fact to
> > > improve its precision. Explicitly request the modeling in the transfer
> > > function works OK when we only have a couple things to model. But it
> > > might not scale in the future. When we model dozens of standard types and
> > > functions we would not want all the analysis clients to invoke all the
> > > transfers for all the models individually.
> > Agreed. It seems similar the problems that motivated DLLs back in the day.
> > there's clearly a lot to be worked out here in terms of how best to support
> > composition. It's probably worth a RFC or somesuch to discuss in more depth.
> Having an RFC and some deeper discussions would be great. I also wonder
> whether modeling arbitrary `Stmt`s is the right approach. The peculiarities
> of the language should probably be modelled by the framework itself without
> any extensions. Maybe we only want the modeling of certain function calls to
> be customizable?
Good question. It would be really nice if we could draw this line, but I have a
bad feeling that it won't be so simple. :) Still, worth looking at our existing
models, and new ones that we're developing, to see if we can find a clear
"bounding box".
What does CSA do in this regard?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D121797/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D121797
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
