manas added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RangeConstraintManager.cpp:1223-1225
+template <>
+RangeSet SymbolicRangeInferrer::VisitBinaryOperator<BO_NE>(Range LHS, Range
RHS,
+ QualType T) {
----------------
vsavchenko wrote:
> I think it should be a specialization for another `VisitBinaryOperator`.
> In the switch, you can see that we give range sets for `LHS` and `RHS`, so
> how does it work?
> There is a function in between (also `VisitBinaryOperator`) that creates
> simple ranges out of range sets and ask to visit binary operator for those.
> You can specialize it instead since we can simply check for empty
> intersection of range sets.
I went through the code and understood that part. I agree that this should be a
specialized case for VisitBinaryOperator. So I understand it in this way:
1. Creating a new `VisitBinaryOperator(Range,Range,QualType)` which can check
for empty intersections.
2. It will then call to appropriate functions (like
`VisittBinaryOperator<BO_NE>` and others.)
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RangeConstraintManager.cpp:1241
+ // In all other cases, the resulting range cannot be deduced.
+ return RangeFactory.getEmptySet();
+}
----------------
vsavchenko wrote:
> Empty range set means "This situation is IMPOSSIBLE". Is that what you want
> here?
True! That's incorrect. We cannot find a good rangeset. Should I rather return
the entire RangeSet inferred from `T`?
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/constant-folding.c:470-504
+ // Checks when ranges are not overlapping
+ if (a <= 10 && b >= 20) {
+ clang_analyzer_eval((a != b) != 0); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ }
+
+ if (c <= INT_MIN + 10 && d >= INT_MAX - 10) {
+ clang_analyzer_eval((c != d) == 0); // expected-warning{{FALSE}}
----------------
vsavchenko wrote:
> Did you try it in debugger, do we get inside of your function?
Yes, the function is being reached.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D106102/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D106102
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
