[cfe-commits] [PATCH] strnlen checker

[Ted Kremenek]

On Feb 22, 2011, at 8:53 AM, Lenny Maiorani wrote:

> On 02/21/2011 09:22 PM, Ted Kremenek wrote:
>> I was looking at the test cases, and noticed the following diagnostics:
>> 
>>   +  return strnlen(0, 3); // expected-warning{{Null pointer argument in call to byte string function}}
>> 
>> and
>> 
>>   +  return strnlen((char*)&&label, 3); // expected-warning{{Argument to byte string function is the address of the label 'label', which is not a null-terminated string}}
>> 
>> I know you didn't write these diagnostics, but the term "byte string function" sounds very clinical, and not all that helpful.    It's certainly not a term I'm familiar with (even though I can decipher its meaning).  Do you think we should just say the name of the function instead of an opaque term like "byte string function"?
>> 
> Ted,
> 
> Thanks for committing my patches.
> 
> I definitely agree that the term "byte string function" is a little ambiguous and possibly too proper. Changing that should be straight forward provided the CheckerContext knows the function in question. I assume it does and I just need to look into it.

CStringChecker clearly knows the name of the function, since it dispatches off the function name in 'evalCall()'.

> 
> Expect a patch sometime soon.

Sounds great!