dcoughlin added a comment.
Are the parameter types actually needed? I think in general the rest of the
analyzer uses arity alone.
Is the idea to allow for overloads in C++? If so, then I think this
equivalent-up-to-size-and-sign approach will disallow those overloads.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StdLibraryFunctionsChecker.cpp:393
+bool StdLibraryFunctionsChecker::FunctionSummaryTy::typesAreEqual(
+ QualType Lhs, QualType Rhs, ASTContext &ACtx) {
----------------
Maybe this should be named something like "typesMatch" since it is not actually
return whether the types are equal?
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StdLibraryFunctionsChecker.cpp:418
+
+ return ACtx.getTypeSize(Lhs) == ACtx.getTypeSize(Rhs);
+}
----------------
If the problem is only for ssize_t, would it make sense to only do this if both
the lhs and rhs are signed?
Another possibility is to have an lhs of what we think is the ssize_t type
match any signed type.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25940
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
