On Tue, 16 Feb 2016, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Well, it's just that "s" has the nonnull attribute so the compiler thinks it
> should never be null in which case comparing it to null should be redundant.
> Doesn't seem like a false positive to me, but maybe someone else feels
> otherwise.
Please look at the posted code again:
static void f(const char *s)
{
do {
printf("%s\n",s);
s = NULL;
} while (s != NULL);
}
Since 's' is assigned to, the constraint from 'printf' is no longer useful for
warning at the point of comparison. It clearly looks like a false positive to
me.
Alexander
