Some checkers may not only depend on language options but also analyzer options.
To make this possible this patch changes the parameter of the shouldRegister*
function to CheckerManager to be able to query the analyzer options when
deciding whether the checker should be registered.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75271
Introduce the boolean ento::shouldRegister##CHECKERNAME(const LangOptions &LO)
function very similarly to ento::register##CHECKERNAME. This will force every
checker to implement this function, but maybe it isn't that bad: I saw a lot of
ObjC or C++ specific checkers that should probably not register themselves based
on some LangOptions (mine too), but they do anyways.
A big benefit of this is that all registry functions now register their checker,
once it is called, registration is guaranteed.
This patch is a part of a greater effort to reinvent checker registration, more
info here: D54438#1315953
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55424
llvm-svn: 352277
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
ClangCheckerRegistry is a very non-obvious, poorly documented, weird concept.
It derives from CheckerRegistry, and is placed in lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend,
whereas it's base is located in lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core. It was, from what I can
imagine, used to circumvent the problem that the registry functions of the
checkers are located in the clangStaticAnalyzerCheckers library, but that
library depends on clangStaticAnalyzerCore. However, clangStaticAnalyzerFrontend
depends on both of those libraries.
One can make the observation however, that CheckerRegistry has no place in Core,
it isn't used there at all! The only place where it is used is Frontend, which
is where it ultimately belongs.
This move implies that since
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ClangCheckers.h only contained a single function:
class CheckerRegistry;
void registerBuiltinCheckers(CheckerRegistry ®istry);
it had to re purposed, as CheckerRegistry is no longer available to
clangStaticAnalyzerCheckers. It was renamed to BuiltinCheckerRegistration.h,
which actually describes it a lot better -- it does not contain the registration
functions for checkers, but only those generated by the tblgen files.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54436
llvm-svn: 349275
The implementation is in AnalysisDeclContext.cpp and the class is called
AnalysisDeclContext.
Making those match up has numerous benefits, including:
- Easier jump from header to/from implementation.
- Easily identify filename from class.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37500
llvm-svn: 312671
The patch is generated using this command:
$ tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
-checks=-*,llvm-namespace-comment -header-filter='llvm/.*|clang/.*' \
work/llvm/tools/clang
To reduce churn, not touching namespaces spanning less than 10 lines.
llvm-svn: 240270
Summary:
In clang-tidy we'd like to know the name of the checker producing each
diagnostic message. PathDiagnostic has BugType and Category fields, which are
both arbitrary human-readable strings, but we need to know the exact name of the
checker in the form that can be used in the CheckersControlList option to
enable/disable the specific checker.
This patch adds the CheckName field to the CheckerBase class, and sets it in
the CheckerManager::registerChecker() method, which gets them from the
CheckerRegistry.
Checkers that implement multiple checks have to store the names of each check
in the respective registerXXXChecker method.
Reviewers: jordan_rose, krememek
Reviewed By: jordan_rose
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2557
llvm-svn: 201186
uncovered.
This required manually correcting all of the incorrect main-module
headers I could find, and running the new llvm/utils/sort_includes.py
script over the files.
I also manually added quite a few missing headers that were uncovered by
shuffling the order or moving headers up to be main-module-headers.
llvm-svn: 169237
While the check itself should count 0-based for the parameter index,
the diagnostic should be 1-based (first, second, third, not start at 0).
Fixes <rdar://problem/12249569>.
llvm-svn: 163375
consolidate some commonly used category strings into global references (more of this can be done, I just did a few).
Fixes <rdar://problem/11191537>.
llvm-svn: 154121
the the code like this (due to x and &x being the same value but
different size):
void* x[] = { ptr1, ptr2, ptr3 };
CFArrayCreate(NULL, (const void **) &x, count, NULL);
llvm-svn: 149579
using CFArrayCreate & family.
Specifically, CFArrayCreate's input should be:
'A C array of the pointer-sized values to be in the new array.'
(radar://10717339)
llvm-svn: 149008
Kirstóf Umann