Re: clang's static checker report.

On 30 Aug 2009, at 18:07, Greg Stark wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Grzegorz Jaskiewicz<gj@pointblue.com.pl 
> > wrote:
>> with Greg's suggested palloc and friends patch:
>> http://zlew.org/postgresql_static_check/scan-build-2009-08-30-3
>
> Argh. That didn't help at all. hm, I suppose instead of (exit(1),NULL)
> we could just put ((void*)1) there?
>
> But I think Tom's right. Worse, I think until it can do
> inter-procedural analysis these messages will always be nearly all
> false positives. Many if not most of our functions take pointers or
> data structures which contain pointers as arguments or return values.
> Most of the time those arguments and return values cannot contain NULL
> pointers and the code doesn't bother to check that every single time.


sure, I can try.
Btw, I got response to my bug from llvm devs, and they fully agree on  
all that.