bruno added a subscriber: bruno. bruno added a comment. Hi Daniel,
This is very nice. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24861#553606, @danielmarjamaki wrote: > Compiling 2064 projects resulted in 904 warnings > > Here are the results: > https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BykPmWrCOxt2N04tYl8zVHA3MXc/view?usp=sharing > > The results looks acceptable imho. The code looks intentional in many cases > so I believe there are users that will disable this warning. Probably there > are true positives where the evaluation order is not really known. There were > many warnings about macro arguments where the macro bitshifts the argument - > these macros look very shaky to me. > > I saw some warnings about such code: > > a * b << c > > > Maybe we should not warn about this. As far as I see, the result will be the > same if (a*b) or (b<<c) is evaluated first - unless there is some overflow or > signedness issues. What do you think? I'll keep these warnings for now. Any idea on how expensive would be to reason about these false positives and avoid them? Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D24861 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
