Skip to content

valueflow.cpp: reduced some variable scopes/lifetimes #7076

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 15, 2024
Merged

valueflow.cpp: reduced some variable scopes/lifetimes #7076

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
23fe625
valueflow.cpp: do not perform function call in `valueFlowImpossibleVa…
firewave Aug 31, 2024
eef0e80
valueflow.cpp: reduced variable scope in `valueFlowConditionExpressio…
firewave Sep 29, 2024
cbc0062
valueflow.cpp: reduced variable scope in `LifeTimeStore::byRef()`
firewave Sep 29, 2024
3201d01
valueflow.cpp: reduced lifetime of object in `valueFlowSymbolicInfer()`
firewave Oct 16, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
15 changes: 9 additions & 6 deletions lib/valueflow.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1063,7 +1063,6 @@ static void valueFlowImpossibleValues(TokenList& tokenList, const Settings& sett
flipped = true;
else if (!std::equal(tokens.cbegin(), tokens.cend(), branches.cbegin(), &isSameToken))
continue;
const bool isMin = Token::Match(condTok, "<|<=") ^ flipped;
std::vector<ValueFlow::Value> values;
for (const Token* tok2 : tokens) {
if (tok2->hasKnownIntValue()) {
Expand All @@ -1083,6 +1082,7 @@ static void valueFlowImpossibleValues(TokenList& tokenList, const Settings& sett
});
}
}
const bool isMin = Token::Match(condTok, "<|<=") ^ flipped;
for (ValueFlow::Value& value : values) {
value.setImpossible();
if (isMin) {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -2072,12 +2072,12 @@ struct LifetimeStore {
for (const ValueFlow::LifetimeToken& lt : ValueFlow::getLifetimeTokens(argtok, settings)) {
if (!settings.certainty.isEnabled(Certainty::inconclusive) && lt.inconclusive)
continue;
ErrorPath er = errorPath;
er.insert(er.end(), lt.errorPath.cbegin(), lt.errorPath.cend());
if (!lt.token)
return false;
if (!pred(lt.token))
return false;
ErrorPath er = errorPath;
er.insert(er.end(), lt.errorPath.cbegin(), lt.errorPath.cend());
er.emplace_back(argtok, message);

ValueFlow::Value value;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -3332,7 +3332,6 @@ static void valueFlowConditionExpressions(const TokenList& tokenlist,
Token* parenTok = tok->next();
if (!Token::simpleMatch(parenTok->link(), ") {"))
continue;
Token* blockTok = parenTok->link()->tokAt(1);
const Token* condTok = parenTok->astOperand2();
if (condTok->exprId() == 0)
continue;
Expand All @@ -3343,6 +3342,7 @@ static void valueFlowConditionExpressions(const TokenList& tokenlist,
const bool isOp = condTok->isComparisonOp() || condTok->tokType() == Token::eLogicalOp;
const bool is1 = isOp || astIsBool(condTok);

Token* blockTok = parenTok->link()->tokAt(1);
Token* startTok = blockTok;
// Inner condition
{
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -3699,8 +3699,11 @@ static void valueFlowSymbolicInfer(const SymbolDatabase& symboldatabase, const S
if (astIsFloat(tok->astOperand2(), false))
continue;

SymbolicInferModel leftModel{tok->astOperand1()};
std::vector<ValueFlow::Value> values = infer(leftModel, tok->str(), 0, tok->astOperand2()->values());
std::vector<ValueFlow::Value> values;
Copy link
Owner

@danmar danmar Dec 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't an opinion but we could also write:

 std::vector<ValueFlow::Value> values = [tok](){
        SymbolicInferModel leftModel{tok->astOperand1()};
        return infer(leftModel, tok->str(), 0, tok->astOperand2()->values());
 }();

Use the syntax you like..

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@firewave firewave Dec 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do not find that more readable. I am also not sure fi that might introduce some overhead.

I mainly changed this because I was debugging the lifetime of the infer models at some point and was confused that two of them were alive at the same time.

Copy link
Owner

@danmar danmar Dec 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok np

{
SymbolicInferModel leftModel{tok->astOperand1()};
values = infer(leftModel, tok->str(), 0, tok->astOperand2()->values());
}
if (values.empty()) {
SymbolicInferModel rightModel{tok->astOperand2()};
values = infer(rightModel, tok->str(), tok->astOperand1()->values(), 0);
Expand Down
Loading