llvm-project/clang/test/Analysis/ObjCProperties.m

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

54 lines
1.2 KiB
Mathematica
Raw Normal View History

// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -w %s -verify \
// RUN: -analyzer-checker=core,alpha.core,debug.ExprInspection
#ifdef HEADER // A clever trick to avoid splitting up the test.
[C11/C2x] Change the behavior of the implicit function declaration warning C89 had a questionable feature where the compiler would implicitly declare a function that the user called but was never previously declared. The resulting function would be globally declared as extern int func(); -- a function without a prototype which accepts zero or more arguments. C99 removed support for this questionable feature due to severe security concerns. However, there was no deprecation period; C89 had the feature, C99 didn't. So Clang (and GCC) both supported the functionality as an extension in C99 and later modes. C2x no longer supports that function signature as it now requires all functions to have a prototype, and given the known security issues with the feature, continuing to support it as an extension is not tenable. This patch changes the diagnostic behavior for the -Wimplicit-function-declaration warning group depending on the language mode in effect. We continue to warn by default in C89 mode (due to the feature being dangerous to use). However, because this feature will not be supported in C2x mode, we've diagnosed it as being invalid for so long, the security concerns with the feature, and the trivial workaround for users (declare the function), we now default the extension warning to an error in C99-C17 mode. This still gives users an easy workaround if they are extensively using the extension in those modes (they can disable the warning or use -Wno-error to downgrade the error), but the new diagnostic makes it more clear that this feature is not supported and should be avoided. In C2x mode, we no longer allow an implicit function to be defined and treat the situation the same as any other lookup failure. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122983
2022-04-20 23:25:35 +08:00
extern void clang_analyzer_eval(int);
@interface NSObject
@end
@interface HeaderClass : NSObject
@property NSObject *prop;
@end
#else
#define HEADER
#include "ObjCProperties.m"
@implementation HeaderClass
- (void)foo {
if ((self.prop)) {
}
// This test tests that no dynamic bifurcation is performed on the property.
// The TRUE/FALSE dilemma correctly arises from eagerly-assume behavior
// inside the if-statement. The dynamic bifurcation at (self.prop) inside
// the if-statement was causing an UNKNOWN to show up as well due to
// extra parentheses being caught inside PseudoObjectExpr.
// This should not be UNKNOWN.
clang_analyzer_eval(self.prop); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
// expected-warning@-1{{FALSE}}
}
@end
// The point of this test cases is to exercise properties in the static
// analyzer
@interface MyClass {
@private
id _X;
}
- (id)initWithY:(id)Y;
@property(copy, readwrite) id X;
@end
@implementation MyClass
@synthesize X = _X;
- (id)initWithY:(id)Y {
self.X = Y;
return self;
}
@end
#endif