<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Sep 16, 2013, at 22:34 , Ben Pope <<a href="mailto:benpope81@gmail.com">benpope81@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">On 17/09/13 01:16, Anna Zaks wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">We don't have a list of known third-party headers anywhere, but having this seems generally useful.<br></blockquote><br>Determining them based on -I vs -isystem would seem to be a sensible<br>distinction.<br><br>At least, that's what I use to include third party libraries when I want<br>to ignore warnings they produce. It's entirely possible I'm abusing<br>that feature.<br></blockquote><br></div><div>It's a bit of an abuse but likely not a harmful one. Huh, we don't actually have that mode now. Regular mode runs path-sensitive checks on the main source file and non-path-sensitive checks on the main source file + non-system headers. -analyzer-opt-analyze-headers mode runs path-sensitive checks everywhere. Patches welcome?</div><div><br></div><div>As for an explicit blacklist, we've gotten that request before, but only for main source files: <a href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2706">PR2706</a> and <<a href="rdar://problem/9063762">rdar://problem/9063762</a>>. A header file filter would be slightly different.</div><div><br></div><div>Jordan</div></body></html>