On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
Pointers one-past-the-end of an array are non-null, but not dereferenceable. > > I'd prefer nonnull_param. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
