tahonermann added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/MemRegion.cpp:1034-1042 + if (T.isNull() || !T->getAs<FunctionType>()) + // If the type is invalid or is not a function type, we cannot get + // a block pointer type for it. This isn't ideal, but it's better + // than asserting in getBlockPointerType() or creating a function + // without a prototype in a language that has no such concept (like + // C++ or C2x). + sReg = getUnknownRegion(); ---------------- rsmith wrote: > I find it really surprising that the "signature is present but is not a > function type" case is reachable -- the static analyzer should only run on > valid code, and in valid code I'd expect the signature of a block would > always be a function type. Is that case actually reached in our test suite? > > I worry that the "block has no explicit signature" case here is common, and > that we're losing substantial coverage in that case. Per > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/BlockLanguageSpec.html#block-literal-expressions, > `^ { ... }` is equivalent to `^ (void) { ... }`, so it seems the original > code here was just wrong and we should always have been creating a > `FunctionProtoType` in this case. I haven't studied the surrounding code much, so perhaps this comment isn't applicable, but I would expect `FunctionProtoType` to be applicable when an empty parameter list is explicitly specified as in `^ () { ... }` prior to C2x. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D123955/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D123955 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
