Fix FP reported in #466#520
Merged
rvermeulen merged 12 commits intogithub:mainfrom Feb 12, 2024
Merged
Conversation
A call to a `constexpr` function is insufficient to determine that the return value is compile time computed. We need to also validate that its arguments are compile time computed.
This is required to exclude it from the FunctionMissingConstexpr.ql query because it is not marked `constexpr`
knewbury01
requested changes
Feb 2, 2024
Collaborator
knewbury01
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
some logic requiring reconsideration I believe
Need to consider all possible values passed as arguments and default values.
Exclude non-static members from being marked as `constexpr`.
knewbury01
requested changes
Feb 5, 2024
This reverts commit 7361106. The change was incorrect and caused the rule to miss some cases.
1a47115 to
588774c
Compare
588774c to
a0fb33c
Compare
Before the analysis only considered whether the source of an argument passed to a function was computed at compile time. Now we consider whether intermediate variables are also constexpr even though their values are compile time constants, because otherwise the compiler will accept the variable receiving the compiled time constant to be a constexpr variable.
a0fb33c to
591c755
Compare
knewbury01
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2024
Collaborator
knewbury01
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nice!
I was naively thinking getting those extra testcases fairly accurate was as simple as - if another assignment (to anything) exists control flow upwards cut those out, but I definitely think that would also have not been as precise at what you implemented
very cool, think it looks good
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Fixes #466
Change request type
.ql,.qll,.qlsor unit tests)Rules with added or modified queries
Release change checklist
A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:
If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.
Author: Is a change note required?
🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.
Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.
Query development review checklist
For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:
Author
As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
Reviewer
As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.