[PATCH] D32905: [Analyzer] Iterator Checker - Part 9: Evaluation of std::find-like calls

Artem Dergachev via Phabricator via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Dec 14 16:03:46 PST 2017

NoQ added inline comments.
Herald added subscribers: a.sidorin, rnkovacs, szepet.

Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/IteratorChecker.cpp:1584-1588
+  auto stateFound = state->BindExpr(CE, LCtx, RetVal);
+  auto stateNotFound = state->BindExpr(CE, LCtx, SecondParam);
+  C.addTransition(stateFound);
+  C.addTransition(stateNotFound);
We discussed this in D25660 but i couldn't find what we decided upon. It seems scary to me that in every situation, we declare that it is possible that the element is not in the container. It should be allowed, even if not necessarily efficient, to add the element to the container, and then use `std::find` to obtain an iterator to it. So i think that this state split, even if generally approved by your users, may need to stay under an analyzer checker option.


More information about the cfe-commits mailing list