[cfe-dev] : Clang Static Code Analyzer does not report 'Switch' Statement as a branch condition.

[Zach Davis]

Let me see if I understand the plan:

1. Add a runCheckersForPreStmt() call to ExprEngine::processBranch
right after the call to runCheckersForBranchStmt(), effectively
chaining the two together.  The loop can the evaluate the nodes
returned from both calls?

2. Add a runCheckersForPreStmt() call to the top of
ExprEngine::processSwitch.  The loop will then need to evaluate the
returned nodes as well as explore and evaluate the switch body as it
currently does?

3. Add a runCheckersForPreStmt() call to
ExprEngine::processIndirectGoto and add a loop to evaluate any
returned nodes.

Zach

> Hi, Zach. That's great to hear. The code lives in ExprEngine.cpp, and
> you can see in functions like ExprEngine::VisitUnaryOperator
> (ExprEngineC.cpp) that it basically just consists of a call to the
> CheckerManager to run the pre-statement checks, then a loop over the
> results to actually perform the evaluation. In
> ExprEngine::processBranch the loop is already in place, so you just
> need to add the second callback; ExprEngine::processSwitch also has a
> loop but may need a bit more
> restructuring. ExprEngine::processIndirectGoto is the last of these
> and probably needs a completely new loop added.


On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Dec 6, 2013, at 10:07 , Zach Davis <zdavkeos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Right; what I meant was that we'd prefer to make this work rather than
> adding switch statements to checkBranchCondition, but right now neither one
> works. Sorry for the inconvenience.
> > >
> > > Jordan
> >
> > I had this same problem and ended up using an ast-matcher in a clang
> tool instead to get the information I wanted.
> >
> > I would be interested in helping add this feature though.
> >
> >
> > I found the bug report (18175), but could use some pointers to get
> started on a patch.
>
> Hi, Zach. That's great to hear. The code lives in ExprEngine.cpp, and you
> can see in functions like ExprEngine::VisitUnaryOperator (ExprEngineC.cpp)
> that it basically just consists of a call to the CheckerManager to run the
> pre-statement checks, then a loop over the results to actually perform the
> evaluation. In ExprEngine::processBranch the loop is already in place, so
> you just need to add the second callback; ExprEngine::processSwitch also
> has a loop but may need a bit more restructuring.
> ExprEngine::processIndirectGoto is the last of these and probably needs a
> completely new loop added.
>
> Please feel free to ask more specific questions, and when you're ready
> send the first iteration of your patch to cfe-commits.
>
> Thanks for picking this up!
> Jordan
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20131212/e2f7911d/attachment.html>