[PATCH] Warn on suspicious increments/decrements in for loops

[Richard Trieu]

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote:

> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Richard Trieu <rtrieu at google.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>   @jordan_rose, I want this warning.  Not sure about other people
>>
>>   @gribozavr, earlier versions of this did trigger on LLVM and Clang.
>>  The warning has been fine-tuned since then to avoid those false positives.
>>
>>   Also, I seemed to have messed up the indentation when I wrote the
>> visitors for the first -Wloop-analysis warning and managed to copy the bad
>> indentation over to this change.  I will go fix them.
>
>
> Does this find any other bugs (or false positives) in other code you've
> run it on?
>

 This has found 15-20 bugs so far, with 1-2 false positives.  It is
arguable that using (x+=2) in the loop header instead of two separate
increments would be clearer for the code.

>
>
>>  http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D628
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20130531/70fa093c/attachment.html>