NoQ added a comment.
> It does make sense to split these in two, but I'm not so sure about
> `evalCall`.
`evalCall` should work great for this purpose but definitely not in this
checker. Also this checker would still exercise its `checkPostCall` so it would
still need to be silenced even if `evalCall` is implemented.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/InnerPointerChecker.cpp:234
+ ObjRegion =
+ dyn_cast_or_null<TypedValueRegion>(Call.getArgSVal(0).getAsRegion());
}
----------------
This will crash if someone overloads `std::data` with 0 arguments because your
`CallDescription`s don't require a specific number of arguments. (They're not
allowed to do that, yes, but we're still not allowed to crash.)
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D99260/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D99260
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
