On Monday, 25 December 2017 at 17:03:37 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
I've been writing this article since August, and finally found
some time to finish it:
http://johanengelen.github.io/ldc/2017/12/25/LDC-and-AddressSanitizer.html
"LDC comes with improved support for Address Sanitizer since
the 1.4.0 release. Address Sanitizer (ASan) is a runtime memory
write/read checker that helps discover and locate memory access
bugs. ASan is part of the official LDC release binaries; to use
it you must build with -fsanitize=address. In this article,
I’ll explain how to use ASan, what kind of bugs it can find,
and what bugs it will be able to find in the (hopefully near)
future."
Nice article. Main question / comment is about the need for
blacklisting D standard libraries (druntime/phobos). If someone
wants to try ASan out on their own code, can they start by
ignoring the D standard libraries? And, for programs that use
druntime/phobos, will this be effective? If I understand the
post, the answer is "yes", but I think it could be more explicit.
Second comment is related - If the reader was to try
instrumenting druntime/phobos along with their own code, how much
effort should be expected to correctly blacklist druntime/phobos
code? Would many programs have smooth sailing if they took the
blacklist published in the post? Or is this early stage enough
that some real effort should be expected?
Also, if the blacklist file in the post represents a meaningful
starting point, perhaps it makes sense to check it in and
distribute it. This would provide a place for contributors to
start making improvements.
