[PATCH] D20943: [LibFuzzer] [WIP] Declare and use sanitizer functions in `fuzzer::ExternalFunctions`

[Dan Liew via llvm-commits]

delcypher added inline comments.

================
Comment at: lib/Fuzzer/FuzzerDriver.cpp:428
@@ +427,3 @@
+// Storage for global ExternalFunctions object.
+ExternalFunctions EF;
+
----------------
kcc wrote:
> delcypher wrote:
> > kcc wrote:
> > > make this ExternalFunctions *EF
> > We could also use  `std::unique_ptr<ExternalFunctions>` instead or are you fine with an explicit delete?
> I am *not* ok with std::unique_ptr<ExternalFunctions>
> And there is no need for an explicit delete. 
> Just 
>     EF = new  .... ;
> in main is enough 
> 
> In tests you may have new/delete or even 
>      std::unique_ptr<ExternalFunctions> t;
>      EF = t.get()
> I am *not* ok with std::unique_ptr<ExternalFunctions>
> And there is no need for an explicit delete. 
> Just
> 
> EF = new  .... ;
> in main is enough

I don't understand. Why do you want a deliberate leak?

> In tests you may have new/delete or even
> 
> std::unique_ptr<ExternalFunctions> t;
> EF = t.get()

Again I don't understand. Why would I want to assign nullptr (that is what `t.get()` would return here) to `EF`?




http://reviews.llvm.org/D20943