Yeah, I think it's fine to commit as is, and refine in further patches.
Thanks Lenny!
On Apr 11, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Lenny Maiorani wrote:
> On 04/08/2011 05:37 PM, Ted Kremenek wrote:
>> Hi Lenny,
>>
>> I understand the intent is to model comparing raw string literals, but I
>> think the use of getCStringLiteral() discards too much information. For
>> example, I don't think the following will be handled correctly:
>>
>> const char *s1 = "foobar";
>> const char *s2 = "bar";
>> return strcmp(&s1[3], s2);
>>
>> In order to model strcmp() properly, you will also need to take into account
>> the offset within the string literal.
>>
>> Also, could you add a FIXME indicating that this logic only handles
>> comparing string literals (albeit, it handles flow analysis)? Conceptually,
>> we could enhance this to also handle non-literals as well in a variety of
>> ways.
> Nice catch Ted!
>
> In fact, I think the entire CString checker needs this. I just tested strlen
> and that didn't work in this case either:
> void strlen_with_offset(const char *x) {
> if (strlen(x) != 5)
> return;
> if (strlen(&x[2]) != 3)
> (void)*(char*)0; // no-warning
> }
>
> Is this patch ok to be committed in lieu of this change? The next task I will
> take on will be fixing the modeling of all the functions in the CString
> checker to accommodate for this oversight. It will probably be a small
> change, but pervasive throughout the checker.
>
>
> -Lenny
>
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
