[PATCH] D46752: [Analysis] Validate the return type of s(n)printf libcalls

[Martin Storsjö via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

mstorsjo added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46752#1096016, @spatel wrote:

> LGTM - thanks!
>  Note (future patches): just glancing at the surrounding cases, it seems like we're missing similar return type checks for other calls.


Yup. Although I guess it's mostly a question of what optimizations require what details to match; for this particular optimization, it could have been made to handle the case of a void return as well (but it's not necessarily worth to).


https://reviews.llvm.org/D46752