[PATCH] D64274: [analyzer] VirtualCallChecker overhaul.

[Artem Dergachev via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

NoQ added a comment.

In D64274#1584974 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64274#1584974>, @baloghadamsoftware wrote:

> Hmm, I still fail to understand the problem with the current `VirtualCall` checker. Is it unstable? Does it report many false positives?


Yeah, pretty much. It's basically defined to find non-bugs and so far i've seen no indication that a lot of them are actually bugs, but it's rather the opposite, and it's rather noisy. It defines a good practice to follow ("if you truly want to call a virtual function and you understand that no virtual dispatch will happen, add an explicit qualifier"), but i feel uncomfy to force this recommendation upon people by default. That's still a good check but that's not a kind of thing that people ask for when they're using the analyzer. Btw, this check could probably benefit from a fixit hint (which adds the missing qualifier).

When the function is pure virtual, it's an immediate UB, so it's something we can always warn about.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D64274/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D64274