flovent wrote: > What do you think of going with an approach like this instead: > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/169629#issuecomment-3637937161 ?
This is another way to fix it and i am sure it's a correcy way too, we need to add some extra check for `UnsafeArg`. I did it this way because `hasUnsafeFormatOrSArg`'s comment says it will make sure `UnsafeArg` is set to a valid state when it returns true. > // `UnsafeArg` is the output argument that will be set only if this function // returns true. But i am ok with the other approach, just need to delete this comment. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/170496 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
