================
@@ -1986,112 +2327,142 @@ class DerefSimplePtrArithFixableGadget : public
FixableGadget {
}
};
-/// Scan the function and return a list of gadgets found with provided kits.
-static void findGadgets(const Stmt *S, ASTContext &Ctx,
- const UnsafeBufferUsageHandler &Handler,
- bool EmitSuggestions, FixableGadgetList
&FixableGadgets,
- WarningGadgetList &WarningGadgets,
- DeclUseTracker &Tracker) {
+class EvaluatedStmtMatcher : public CustomMatcher {
- struct GadgetFinderCallback : MatchFinder::MatchCallback {
- GadgetFinderCallback(FixableGadgetList &FixableGadgets,
- WarningGadgetList &WarningGadgets,
- DeclUseTracker &Tracker)
- : FixableGadgets(FixableGadgets), WarningGadgets(WarningGadgets),
- Tracker(Tracker) {}
-
- void run(const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result) override {
- // In debug mode, assert that we've found exactly one gadget.
- // This helps us avoid conflicts in .bind() tags.
-#if NDEBUG
-#define NEXT return
-#else
- [[maybe_unused]] int numFound = 0;
-#define NEXT ++numFound
-#endif
+public:
+ WarningGadgetList &WarningGadgets;
- if (const auto *DRE = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<DeclRefExpr>("any_dre")) {
- Tracker.discoverUse(DRE);
- NEXT;
- }
+ EvaluatedStmtMatcher(WarningGadgetList &WarningGadgets)
+ : WarningGadgets(WarningGadgets) {}
- if (const auto *DS = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<DeclStmt>("any_ds")) {
- Tracker.discoverDecl(DS);
- NEXT;
- }
+ bool matches(const DynTypedNode &DynNode, ASTContext &Ctx,
+ const UnsafeBufferUsageHandler &Handler) override {
+ const Stmt *S = DynNode.get<Stmt>();
+ if (!S)
+ return false;
+
+ MatchResult Result;
+#define WARNING_GADGET(name)
\
----------------
ilya-biryukov wrote:
This is a concrete suggestion on how to keep the number of macros the same, a
follow-up to the comment above about the duplicated macros.
I would pick a simpler signature for `match` over macros. Could we just add all
4 parameters to every match function and ignore them where they aren't needed?
If the decreased readability is a concern because of long function signatures,
we could always introduce a parameter object to counter that. I suspect this
won't be necessary, though.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124554
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
