On Feb 19, 2014, at 7:58 PM, Hal Finkel <[email protected]> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Richard Smith" <[email protected]> >> To: "Ted Kremenek" <[email protected]> >> Cc: "cfe commits" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 8:40:18 PM >> Subject: Re: r201162 - 'nonnull(1)' on a block parameter should apply to the >> block's argument. >> >> >> >> >> >> Heh, I see what you did there :-) Here are some options: >> >> >> nonnull_param, required, notnull, dereferenceable > > I'd like to have a dereferenceable attribute, but I don't think we have > backend support for that right now (then again, maybe we don't have backend > support for notnull either). AFAIK, notnull allows constant folding of > comparisons against the null pointer, whereas dereferenceable would allow > that plus speculative loading.
... getting back to this. How is "dereferenceable" different than "nonnull_param"? I'd prefer the latter since it aligns with the other user attributes for this concept that we already have. I'd prefer nonnull_param.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
