Logical short-circuit operators now act like other branch conditions.
If the symbolic value of the left-hand side is not known to be true or false
(based on the previous execution path), the "Assuming" event piece is added
in order to explain that the analyzer is adding a new assumption.
Additionally, when the assumption is made against the right-hand side of
the logical operator (i.e. when the operator itself acts as a condition
in another CFG terminator), the "Assuming..." piece is written out for the
right-hand side of the operator rather than for the whole operator.
This allows expression-specific diagnostic message text to be constructed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25092
llvm-svn: 283302
In the analyzer's path-sensitive reports, when a report goes through a branch
and the branch condition cannot be decided to be definitely true or false
(based on the previous execution path), an event piece is added that tells the
user that a new assumption is added upon the symbolic value of the branch
condition. For example, "Assuming 'a' is equal to 3".
The text of the assumption is hand-crafted in various manners depending on
the AST expression. If the AST expression is too complex and the text of
the assumption fails to be constructed, the event piece is omitted.
This causes loss of information and misunderstanding of the report.
Do not omit the event piece even if the expression is too complex;
add a piece with a generic text instead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23300
llvm-svn: 283301
This patch adds hashes to the plist and html output to be able to identfy bugs
for suppressing false positives or diff results against a baseline. This hash
aims to be resilient for code evolution and is usable to identify bugs in two
different snapshots of the same software. One missing piece however is a
permanent unique identifier of the checker that produces the warning. Once that
issue is resolved, the hashes generated are going to change. Until that point
this feature is marked experimental, but it is suitable for early adoption.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305
Original patch by: Bence Babati!
llvm-svn: 251011
to the plist output. This check_name field does not guaranteed to be the
same as the name of the checker in the future.
Reviewer: Anna Zaks
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6841
llvm-svn: 228624
We could certainly be more precise in many of our diagnostics, but before we
were printing "Assuming x is && y", which is just ridiculous.
<rdar://problem/15167979>
llvm-svn: 193455