[analyzer][NFC] Factor out the copy-paste code repetition of assumeDual and assumeInclusiveRangeDual

Depends on D125892. There might be efficiency and performance
implications by using a lambda. Thus, I am going to conduct measurements
to see if there is any noticeable impact.
I've been thinking about two more alternatives:
1) Make `assumeDualImpl` a variadic template and (perfect) forward the
   arguments for the used `assume` function.
2) Use a macros.
I have concerns though, whether these alternatives would deteriorate the
readability of the code.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125954
This commit is contained in:
Gabor Marton 2022-05-19 11:14:56 +02:00
parent 32f189b0d9
commit 96fba640cf
2 changed files with 22 additions and 30 deletions

View File

@ -162,6 +162,10 @@ protected:
/// Returns whether or not a symbol is known to be null ("true"), known to be
/// non-null ("false"), or may be either ("underconstrained").
virtual ConditionTruthVal checkNull(ProgramStateRef State, SymbolRef Sym);
template <typename AssumeFunction>
ProgramStatePair assumeDualImpl(ProgramStateRef &State,
AssumeFunction &Assume);
};
std::unique_ptr<ConstraintManager>

View File

@ -42,12 +42,14 @@ ConditionTruthVal ConstraintManager::checkNull(ProgramStateRef State,
return {};
}
template <typename AssumeFunction>
ConstraintManager::ProgramStatePair
ConstraintManager::assumeDual(ProgramStateRef State, DefinedSVal Cond) {
ProgramStateRef StTrue = assumeInternal(State, Cond, true);
ConstraintManager::assumeDualImpl(ProgramStateRef &State,
AssumeFunction &Assume) {
ProgramStateRef StTrue = Assume(true);
if (!StTrue) {
ProgramStateRef StFalse = assumeInternal(State, Cond, false);
ProgramStateRef StFalse = Assume(false);
if (LLVM_UNLIKELY(!StFalse)) { // both infeasible
ProgramStateRef StInfeasible = State->cloneAsPosteriorlyOverconstrained();
assert(StInfeasible->isPosteriorlyOverconstrained());
@ -63,7 +65,7 @@ ConstraintManager::assumeDual(ProgramStateRef State, DefinedSVal Cond) {
return ProgramStatePair(nullptr, StFalse);
}
ProgramStateRef StFalse = assumeInternal(State, Cond, false);
ProgramStateRef StFalse = Assume(false);
if (!StFalse) {
return ProgramStatePair(StTrue, nullptr);
}
@ -71,36 +73,22 @@ ConstraintManager::assumeDual(ProgramStateRef State, DefinedSVal Cond) {
return ProgramStatePair(StTrue, StFalse);
}
ConstraintManager::ProgramStatePair
ConstraintManager::assumeDual(ProgramStateRef State, DefinedSVal Cond) {
auto AssumeFun = [&](bool Assumption) {
return assumeInternal(State, Cond, Assumption);
};
return assumeDualImpl(State, AssumeFun);
}
ConstraintManager::ProgramStatePair
ConstraintManager::assumeInclusiveRangeDual(ProgramStateRef State, NonLoc Value,
const llvm::APSInt &From,
const llvm::APSInt &To) {
ProgramStateRef StInRange =
assumeInclusiveRangeInternal(State, Value, From, To, true);
if (!StInRange) {
ProgramStateRef StOutOfRange =
assumeInclusiveRangeInternal(State, Value, From, To, false);
if (LLVM_UNLIKELY(!StOutOfRange)) { // both infeasible
ProgramStateRef StInfeasible = State->cloneAsPosteriorlyOverconstrained();
assert(StInfeasible->isPosteriorlyOverconstrained());
// Checkers might rely on the API contract that both returned states
// cannot be null. Thus, we return StInfeasible for both branches because
// it might happen that a Checker uncoditionally uses one of them if the
// other is a nullptr. This may also happen with the non-dual and
// adjacent `assume(true)` and `assume(false)` calls. By implementing
// assume in therms of assumeDual, we can keep our API contract there as
// well.
return ProgramStatePair(StInfeasible, StInfeasible);
}
}
ProgramStateRef StOutOfRange =
assumeInclusiveRangeInternal(State, Value, From, To, false);
if (!StOutOfRange) {
return ProgramStatePair(StInRange, nullptr);
}
return ProgramStatePair(StInRange, StOutOfRange);
auto AssumeFun = [&](bool Assumption) {
return assumeInclusiveRangeInternal(State, Value, From, To, Assumption);
};
return assumeDualImpl(State, AssumeFun);
}
ProgramStateRef ConstraintManager::assume(ProgramStateRef State,