[cfe-dev] Are there any santizers for C++/Inactive union member access?

[Nikola Smiljanic via cfe-dev]

I don't think so, you can read a lengthy discussion here
http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/ubsan-active-member-check-for-unions-td4042990.html

On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Jeffrey Walton via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> I was reading "Accessing inactive union member - undefined behavior"
> (http://stackoverflow.com/a/11996970/608639). The rules are kind of
> involved, and it kind of made we wonder how many times I have (or I
> am) violating it.
>
> Are there any santizers for C++/Inactive union member access?
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160509/61337336/attachment.html>