>Hi, > >I feel that to change this checker and the null dereference check would take a >large amount of time compared to what is gained, time which could be used more >efficiently on other checkers. >The null dereference check is already completed as path sensitive and works >well. > >We are talking about converting only the "check after division/dereference" >(not regular div by zero or dereference checks) because these checks require >all paths reasoning (See the "[cfe-dev] [RFC] Creating base class for 'Test >after X' checkers" thread). The main win is >speed (flow sensitive analyzes >are algorithmically much simpler than the path sensitive ones), which also >opens a possibility of converting this into a compiler warning. > >I agree that it would not be a very easy task, but this is the right way to >approach the problem. > >I agree with Anna. Doing this because it's convenient is really just technical >debt and isn't something we'd necessarily be comfortable moving out of the >"alpha" package, meaning that plenty of users won't even know it exists. I can >see us very easily never coming back to >do the "right" thing here. > >Jordan
We still need to know more of how to do the "right" thing. Can you help us more on how to do it cfg-based? Do we need to create our own LiveVariables class for our checkers and then observe it like DeadStoresChecker observes LiveVariables? //Anders _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
