Do you (either of you) think it's worth keeping compatibility names for checkers in 'unix' that move to 'generic'? I don't care so much about the checkers in 'core' because no one should be explicitly turning those on or off, but the Unix ones might be in use.
Jordan On Mar 19, 2014, at 18:11 , Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: > I’d be fine with breaking ‘core’ into ‘core’ and ‘generic’, which clearly > delineates between built-in functionality that is part of the analyzer > basically doing its job and extensions to that behavior via the use of opt-in > checkers. > > On Mar 19, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It depends if we want to move existing checkers around or not. If not, I'm >> not sure it's worth moving MismatchedDeallocators from where it is right >> now. The "unix" checkers are turned on on all platforms right now. If we do >> want to break "core" into "core" and "generic" then MismatchedDeallocators, >> along with Malloc itself, should be moved into "generic" (or whatever we >> decide to call it.) >> >> My inclination is to leave it where it is right now. >> >> (The reason to move it to cplusplus is to skip the check in C modes. That'd >> be correct right now but not in the future. We may or may not care.) >> >> Jordan >> >> >> On Mar 19, 2014, at 17:08, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> You didn’t really answer my question. What is the right answer here? >>> >>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> "unix" includes an awful lot of generic things (like malloc itself). Part >>>> of the problem here is that our "core" checkers are always on. We don't >>>> have "generic-but-not-required" checkers right now. >>>> >>>> Jordan >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 13:55, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> By that argument, does it belong in “unix”? What about Windows-specific >>>>> allocators? >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 1:45 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It's currently specific to C++, but I'm not sure it's inherently >>>>>> specific to C++. I can imagine the FreeBSD guys adding support for >>>>>> custom C allocators too. So I'm not sure it's worth moving. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jordan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 13:27, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Seems fine to me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 1:12 PM, Anton Yartsev <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Propose to move the MismatchedDeallocator checker from unix.* to >>>>>>>> cplusplus.* group if you don't think it's too late. This check is >>>>>>>> specific for C++. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Anton >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <MismatchedDeallocator_rebase.patch>_______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> cfe-commits mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
