[PATCH] D117568: [Analyzer] Add docs to StdCLibraryFunctionArgsChecker

[Artem Dergachev via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

NoQ added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/analyzer/checkers.rst:2361
+    (void)ret;
+    clang_analyzer_eval(EOF <= x && x <= 255); // this reports TRUE
+  }
----------------
I recommend against using `clang_analyzer_eval` in user docs. Users aren't expected to know what it is.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/analyzer/checkers.rst:2366
+suppressed. However, the assumption about the argument is still modeled (otherwise we
+would be further analyzing an illformed program).
+
----------------
Nitpick: the program doesn't become ill-formed just because the user has turned off the checker. Maybe it's better to say that exploring an execution path that already contains undefined behavior is not valuable, or something along those lines(?)


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D117568/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D117568